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.
George Kirsop, Jr., Respondent, v. The Mutual Life Insurance Company, Appellant, 1904 — 178 N.Y. 603 · caselaw · US
General
George Kirsop, Jr., Respondent, v. The Mutual Life Insurance Company, Appellant
178 N.Y. 603·New York Court of Appeals·1904·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
George Kirsop, Jr., Respondent, v. The Mutual Life Insurance Company, Appellant.
Kirsop v. Mutual Life Ins. Co., 87 App. Div. 170, appeal dismissed.
(Argued April 27, 1904;
decided April 28, 1904.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the . Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered November 5, 1903, which reversed an order of Special Term granting a motion to interplead a claimant' of the proceeds of a policy of life insurance issued by the defendant.
Charles B. HotehMss, Julien T. Davies and Gwrrard Glenn for appellant.
Benjami/n B. De Croot for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal dismissed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Oh. „ J., Gray, O’Brien, Bartlett, Haight, Vann and Werner, JJ.