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.
George H. Newcomb et al., Appellants, v. Augusta C. Lush et al., Respondents, 1898 — 155 N.Y. 687 · caselaw · US
General
George H. Newcomb et al., Appellants, v. Augusta C. Lush et al., Respondents
155 N.Y. 687·New York Court of Appeals·1898·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
George H. Newcomb et al., Appellants, v. Augusta C. Lush et al., Respondents.
Newcomb v. Lush, 84 Hun, 254, affirmed.
(Argued March 18, 1898;
decided April 19, 1898.)
Appeal from an order of the late General Term of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered February 14, 1895, reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Circuit, a jury having been waived, and granting a new trial.
Theodore F. Hamilton for appellants.
E. Countryman and Learned Hand for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed and judgment absolute ordered for defendants on stipulation, with costs, on opinion below.
All concur.