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.
The New York, Lake Erie and Western Railroad Company, Appellant, v. The City of Dunkirk, Respondent., 1894 — 143 N.Y. 659 · caselaw · US
Civil Procedure · MBE-tested
The New York, Lake Erie and Western Railroad Company, Appellant, v. The City of Dunkirk, Respondent.
143 N.Y. 659·New York Court of Appeals·1894·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
The New York, Lake Erie and Western Railroad Company, Appellant, v. The City of Dunkirk, Respondent.
(Argued June 11, 1894;
decided October 9, 1894.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order made October 4,1892, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendant, entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term.
George F. Brownell for appellant.
Walter B. Holt for respondent.
Reported below, 63 Hun, 494.
[MAJORITY]
Agree to affirm on opinion below.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.