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 Sebastian Smith, Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent, 1893 — 137 N.Y. 562 · caselaw · US
General
John Sebastian Smith, Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent
137 N.Y. 562·New York Court of Appeals·1893·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 Sebastian Smith, Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent.
(Argued January 27, 1893;
decided February 10, 1893.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, in favor of plaintiff, entered upon an order made January 22, 1892, which affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial and directed judgment on a nonsuit granted at Circuit.
Elbridge L. Adams for appellant.
Albert H. Harris for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur, except Andrews, Oh. J., O’Brien and Maynard, JJ., dissenting.
Judgment affirmed.