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.
Edward Fredricks et al., Appellants, v. The City of New York, Respondent, 1901 — 165 N.Y. 656 · caselaw · US
Corporations
Edward Fredricks et al., Appellants, v. The City of New York, Respondent
165 N.Y. 656·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
Edward Fredricks et al., Appellants, v. The City of New York, Respondent.
Fredricks v. City of New York, 44 App. Div. 374, affirmed.
(Submitted January 15, 1901;
decided January 29, 1901.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered December 15, 1899, upon an order reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court at a Trial Term without a jury, and dismissing the complaint.
George H. Rudolph for appellants.
John Whalen, Corporation Counsel- (Theodore Connoly and George Landon of counsel), for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., Bartlett, Martin, Vann and Landon, JJ. Not voting: Haight and Cullen, JJ.