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.
Sophia Pitcher, as Administratrix, etc., Apellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent, 1891 — 127 N.Y. 678 · caselaw · US
General
Sophia Pitcher, as Administratrix, etc., Apellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent
127 N.Y. 678·New York Court of Appeals·1891·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
Sophia Pitcher, as Administratrix, etc., Apellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent.
(Argued June 12, 1891;
decided June 25, 1891.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, made May 23, 1890, which affirmed an order of Special Term reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict, and granting a new trial.
I). W. Cernieron for appellant.
C. D. Prescott for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur, except Bradley, J., dissenting;
Order affirmed.