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.
Michael J. Dady, Respondent, v. John H. O'Rourke, Appellant, Impleaded with Another, 1901 — 168 N.Y. 668 · caselaw · US
General
Michael J. Dady, Respondent, v. John H. O'Rourke, Appellant, Impleaded with Another
168 N.Y. 668·New York Court of Appeals·1901·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
Michael J. Dady, Respondent, v. John H. O’Rourke, Appellant, Impleaded with Another.
Reported below, 61 App. Div. 529.
(Argued November 11, 1901;
decided November 19, 1901.)
.Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered" June 3, 1901, affirming a judgment- m favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
The motion, was made upon the ground that the question involved is simply academic.
James C. Church for motion.
L. Laflin'Kellogg opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion denied, with ten dollars costs.