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.
Michael Tracey, as Administrator, etc., Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent, 1886 — 103 N.Y. 655 · caselaw · US
General
Michael Tracey, as Administrator, etc., Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent
103 N.Y. 655·New York Court of Appeals·1886·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
Michael Tracey, as Administrator, etc., Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent.
(Argued October 13, 1886;
decided October 26, 1886.)
Amasa J. Parker for appellant.
Hamilton Harris for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm ; no opinion.
All concur, except Ruger, Ch. J., and Daneorth, J., dissenting.
Judgment affirmed.