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.
John Ernest, Appellant, v. The City of Schenectady, Respondent, 1908 — 191 N.Y. 553 · caselaw · US
Corporations
John Ernest, Appellant, v. The City of Schenectady, Respondent
191 N.Y. 553·New York Court of Appeals·1908·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
John Ernest, Appellant, v. The City of Schenectady, Respondent.
Ernest v. Gity of Schenectady, 117 App. Div. 913, affirmed.
(Argued March 11, 1908;
decided March 31, 1908.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered January 22, 1907, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon the report of a referee in an action to recover damages for the alleged unlawful interference by the defendant with the street in front of plaintiff’s premises.
A. S. Golden, and John D. Miller for appellant.
Austin A. Yates, Corporation Counsel (Del B. Salmon of counsel), for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Hiscock and Chase, JJ. Dissenting: Cullen, Ch. J., and Haight, J.