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.
Benedickt Fischer et al., Respondents, v. Berthold Blank, Appellant, 1895 — 144 N.Y. 700 · caselaw · US
General
Benedickt Fischer et al., Respondents, v. Berthold Blank, Appellant
144 N.Y. 700·New York Court of Appeals·1895·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
Benedickt Fischer et al., Respondents, v. Berthold Blank, Appellant.
(Argued January 14, 1895;
decided January 29, 1895.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, made November 16, 1894, which affirmed an order of Special Term adjudging the defendant guilty of contempt of court.
Chas. Goldzier for appellant.
Rowland Cox for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur.
Order affirmed.