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.
Catharine A. Whitlock, Respondent, v. The Town of Brighton, Appellant, 1898 — 154 N.Y. 781 · caselaw · US
General
Catharine A. Whitlock, Respondent, v. The Town of Brighton, Appellant
154 N.Y. 781·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
Catharine A. Whitlock, Respondent, v. The Town of Brighton, Appellant.
Whitlock v. Town of Brighton, 2 App. Div. 21, affirmed.
(Argued December 10, 1897;
decided January 11, 1898.)
Appeal from a judgment of the' Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered February 26, 1896, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and from an order of the Appellate Division which affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial.
Theodore Bacon for appellant.
WülÁam F. Cogswell for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment and order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
All concur.