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.
National Bank of Virginia, Appellant, v. Robert A. Mills et al., Respondents, 1885 — 99 N.Y. 656 · caselaw · US
General
National Bank of Virginia, Appellant, v. Robert A. Mills et al., Respondents
99 N.Y. 656·New York Court of Appeals·1885·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
National Bank of Virginia, Appellant, v. Robert A. Mills et al., Respondents.
(Argued May 6, 1885;
decided June 9, 1885.)
In this action plaintiff was nonsuited on trial. The judgment was reversed on the ground that the evidence required the submission of the case to the jury.
Edward P. Wilder for appellant.
Thomas Bracken for respondents.
[MAJORITY — Danforth, J.,]
Danforth, J.,
reads for reversal and new trial.
All concur.
Judgment reversed.