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.
Charles Jones, Respondent, v. Samuel G. De Coursey, as Receiver of the Western New York and Pennsylvania Railroad Company, Appellant, 1899 — 161 N.Y. 627 · caselaw · US
General
Charles Jones, Respondent, v. Samuel G. De Coursey, as Receiver of the Western New York and Pennsylvania Railroad Company, Appellant
161 N.Y. 627·New York Court of Appeals·1899·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
Charles Jones, Respondent, v. Samuel G. De Coursey, as Receiver of the Western New York and Pennsylvania Railroad Company, Appellant.
Jones v. De Gimrsey, 12 App. Div. 164, affirmed.
(Submitted November 23, 1899;
decided December 15, 1899.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, entered December 22, 1896, upon an order of the Appellate Division in the fourth judicial department, denying a motion for a new trial upon exceptions ordered to be heard in the first instance at the Appellate Division and directing judgment upon a verdict in favor of plaintiff.
Frank Rumsey and John B. Strang for appellant.
J. B. Adams for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion below.
All concur.