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.
Caspar Stapf, Respondent, v. Loewer's Gambrinus Brewery Company, Appellant, 1896 — 151 N.Y. 646 · caselaw · US
General
Caspar Stapf, Respondent, v. Loewer's Gambrinus Brewery Company, Appellant
151 N.Y. 646·New York Court of Appeals·1896·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
Caspar Stapf, Respondent, v. Loewer’s Gambrinus Brewery Company, Appellant.
Eeported below, 1 App. Div. 405.
(Argued December 14, 1896;
decided December 22, 1896.)
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered February 14, 1896, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict.
The motion was made upon the grounds that the Appellate Division unanimously decided that the verdict was supported by evidence, and that no question of law is presented for review.
Alfred & Charles Steckler for motion.
C. J. G. Hall opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion denied, upon authority of Kaplan v. New York Biscuit Company (151 N. Y. 171), but without costs and with the privilege to renew the motion in the case of an amendment of the record showing the decision by the Appellate Division to have been unanimous.