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, Respondent, v. The North River Sugar Refining Company, Appellant, 1890 — 121 N.Y. 696 · caselaw · US
General
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. The North River Sugar Refining Company, Appellant
121 N.Y. 696·New York Court of Appeals·1890·NY
AJI concur.
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, Respondent, v. The North River Sugar Refining Company, Appellant.
(Argued April 22, 1890;
decided June 24, 1890.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made July 9, 1889, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying in part a ' motion for a stay of proceedings.
John E. Pcvrsons and James G. Garter for appellant.'
Ghcvrles F. Tabor, Attorney-General, and Roger A.'Pryor for respondent. •
[MAJORITY]
Agree to dismiss appeal; no opinion.
AJI concur.
Appeal dismissed.