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.
Jay E. Tibbits, Respondent, v. Edward L'Estrange Phipps, Appellant. William Phillips et al., Respondents, 1900 — 163 N.Y. 580 · caselaw · US
General
Jay E. Tibbits, Respondent, v. Edward L'Estrange Phipps, Appellant. William Phillips et al., Respondents
163 N.Y. 580·New York Court of Appeals·1900·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
Jay E. Tibbits, Respondent, v. Edward L’Estrange Phipps, Appellant. William Phillips et al., Respondents.
Tibbits v. Phipps, 30 App. Div. 274, affirmed.
(Argued May 17, 1900;
decided June 5, 1900.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered May 27, 1898, upon an order modifying, and affirming as modified, a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee.
Isaac N. Mills for appellant.
W. R. Spooner and Frank A. Bennett for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment and order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Cli. J., Gray, O’Brien, Haight, Martin, Landon and Werner, JJ.