Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Harry S. Boisnot, Respondent, v. William Wilson, Appellant, 1906 — 186 N.Y. 593 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Harry S. Boisnot, Respondent, v. William Wilson, Appellant
186 N.Y. 593·New York Court of Appeals·1906·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Harry S. Boisnot, Respondent, v. William Wilson, Appellant.
Boisnot v. Wilson, 109 App. Div. 569, modified.
(Argued November 20, 1906;
decided December 4, 1906.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered January 8,1906, modifying and affirming as modified a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee in an action to recover a balance alleged to be due for services under a contract of employment.
Walter D. Clark and R. Floyd Clarke for appellant.
Duncan A. MacIntyre and William B. Ellison for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment entered on report of referee modified in accordance with opinion of Patterson, J., below, and as modified affirmed upon said opinion, without costs.
Concur: Cullen, Cli. J., Gray, Haight, Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett and Hiscock, JJ.