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.
The Sixth National Bank of the City of New York, Appellant, v. The Lorillard Brick Works Company et al., Respondents, 1893 — 136 N.Y. 667 · caselaw · US
General
The Sixth National Bank of the City of New York, Appellant, v. The Lorillard Brick Works Company et al., Respondents
136 N.Y. 667·New York Court of Appeals·1893·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
The Sixth National Bank of the City of New York, Appellant, v. The Lorillard Brick Works Company et al., Respondents.
(Argued December 15, 1892;
decided January 17, 1893.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of New York, entered upon an order made May 2, 1892, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a verdict directed by the court, and affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial.
B. J). Murray for appellant.
Hidlia/rd L. Sweezey for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on opinion below.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.