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.
Magnolia Metal Company, Respondent, v. Sterlingworth Railway Supply Company et al., Appellants, 1900 — 162 N.Y. 607 · caselaw · US
General
Magnolia Metal Company, Respondent, v. Sterlingworth Railway Supply Company et al., Appellants
162 N.Y. 607·New York Court of Appeals·1900·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
Magnolia Metal Company, Respondent, v. Sterlingworth Railway Supply Company et al., Appellants.
Magnolia Metal Co, v. Sterlingworth Ry. S. GC., 33 App. Div. 633, appeal dismissed.
(Submitted February 26, 1900;
decided March 6, 1900.)
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered upon an order made at the August term, 1898^ affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
The motion was made on the grounds that the judgment of the Appellate Division was unanimous, and that the said Appellate Division has not allowed this appeal nor certified that questions of law have arisen which ought to be reviewed by the Court of Appeals.
Nichols & Bacon for motion.
Alex. Thain, opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion to dismiss appeal granted and appeal dismissed, with costs.