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.
Prosper Monnet et al., Respondents, v. Henry Merz, as Survivor, etc., Appellant, 1893 — 138 N.Y. 673 · caselaw · US
General
Prosper Monnet et al., Respondents, v. Henry Merz, as Survivor, etc., Appellant
138 N.Y. 673·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
Prosper Monnet et al., Respondents, v. Henry Merz, as Survivor, etc., Appellant.
(Argued June 14, 1893;
decided June 30, 1893.)
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of Eew York, made May 2, 1892, which reversed, so far as appealed from, a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon the report of a referee, and granted a new trial and vacated and set aside the order of reference.
William Man for appellant.
Willia/m C. Wallace for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur.
Order affirmed.