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.
William L. Stimper, an Infant, by Heinrich Stimper, his Guardian ad Litem, Respondent, v. The Fuchs & Lang Manufacturing Company, Appellant, 1900 — 161 N.Y. 636 · caselaw · US
General
William L. Stimper, an Infant, by Heinrich Stimper, his Guardian ad Litem, Respondent, v. The Fuchs & Lang Manufacturing Company, Appellant
161 N.Y. 636·New York Court of Appeals·1900·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
William L. Stimper, an Infant, by Heinrich Stimper, his Guardian ad Litem, Respondent, v. The Fuchs & Lang Manufacturing Company, Appellant.
Stimper v. Fuchs & Lang Mfg. Go., 26 App. Div. 333, affirmed.
(Argued December 12, 1899;
decided January 9, 1900.)
Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, made February 11, 1898, reversing a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint at a Trial Term, and granting a new trial.
Robert Thorne and Frank V. Johnson for appellant.
Henry Escher, Jr., George F. Elliott and Jay S. Jones for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Order affirmed and judgment absolute ordered for plaintiff on the stipulation, with costs; no opinion.
All concur.