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.
Alexander R. Gebbie et al., Respondents, v. Lovitt E. Stitt, Appellant, 1895 — 148 N.Y. 732 · caselaw · US
General
Alexander R. Gebbie et al., Respondents, v. Lovitt E. Stitt, Appellant
148 N.Y. 732·New York Court of Appeals·1895·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
Alexander R. Gebbie et al., Respondents, v. Lovitt E. Stitt, Appellant.
Reported below, 82 Hun, 93.
(Argued December 9, 1895;
decided December 19, 1895.)
Appeal from order of the General Terra of the Supreme 'Court in the fourth judicial department, made November 20, 1894, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion to dissolve a preliminary injunction.
H. C. Cook for appellant.
Frank Bowman for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal dismissed, with costs; no opinion.
All concur.