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 People of the State of New York v. The Bushwick Chemical Works et al. In the Matter of the Receivership of William Brookfield. Merchants' National Bank of Burlington et al., Appellants, v. William Brookfield, Receiver, Respondent, 1892 — 133 N.Y. 694 · caselaw · US
General
The People of the State of New York v. The Bushwick Chemical Works et al. In the Matter of the Receivership of William Brookfield. Merchants' National Bank of Burlington et al., Appellants, v. William Brookfield, Receiver, Respondent
133 N.Y. 694·New York Court of Appeals·1892·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 People of the State of New York v. The Bushwick Chemical Works et al. In the Matter of the Receivership of William Brookfield. Merchants’ National Bank of Burlington et al., Appellants, v. William Brookfield, Receiver, Respondent.
(Argued June 8, 1892;
decided June 17, 1892.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, made March 31, 1892, which affirmed an order of Special Term overruling exceptions to a referee’s report on a receiver’s accounting.
C. Bavnbridge Smith for appellants.
Charles F. Wells for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on opinion below.
All concur.
Order affirmed.