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.
Lola Yberri Fitch, Respondent, v. Frank H. Fleer and Company, Appellant, 1905 — 181 N.Y. 511 · caselaw · US
General
Lola Yberri Fitch, Respondent, v. Frank H. Fleer and Company, Appellant
181 N.Y. 511·New York Court of Appeals·1905·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
Lola Yberri Fitch, Respondent, v. Frank H. Fleer and Company, Appellant.
Fitch v. Fleer & Company, 96 App. Div. 636, appeal dismissed.
(Argued February 21, 1905;
decided March 7, 1905.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered August 8, 1904, which affirmed. an order of Special Term denying a motion to vacate ah order directing substituted service of a summons and complaint upon the defendant without the state of New York.
Walter Shaw Brewster and James McKeen for appellant.
Paul J5f. Turner for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal dismissed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur; Cullen, Oh. J., Gray, O’Brien, Bartlett, Haight, Vann and Werner, JJ.