Citation Codes Equivalent Citations citation codes Attorney(S) George B. Bradley for the John W. Dininy for the See more information ... Smart Summary Mandeville v. Guernsey, Court of Appeals of the State of New York (Dec. 12, 1872) — Opinion Summary Citation information provided in text: Homer Mandeville, Respondent, v. Henry A. Guernsey, Appellant. Court of Appeals of the State of New York. Argued April 25, 1872. Decided November 12, 1872. Counsel of record (as listed): George B. Bradley for the appellant; John W. Dininy for the respondent. Factual and Procedural Background The provided opinion text contains only the appellate caption, court identification, argument and decision dates, counsel names, and the court's disposition. It does not include factual allegations, the nature of the underlying dispute, or the procedural history leading up to the appeal. Procedurally, this document is an appellate disposition by the Court of Appeals on an appeal brought by Henry A. Guernsey (appellant) from a judgment involving Homer Mandeville (respondent). The court issued a decision on November 12, 1872, and the judgment of the lower court was affirmed. Legal Issues Presented The opinion does not frame specific legal issues. As the text contains only a disposition and no written opinion, distinct legal questions to be resolved are not presented in the provided material. Arguments of the Parties The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments. Table of Precedents Cited No precedents were cited in the provided opinion. Court's Reasoning and Analysis The document supplied is a short disposition without an accompanying written opinion. It records how the justices voted but provides no legal analysis or explanation of the grounds for the court's decision. Specifically, the entry records that Chief Judge Church and Justices Allen, Peckham, and Andrews voted "for affirmance," while Justices Grover, Folger, and Rapallo voted "for reversal." Beyond these votes, the text contains the single dispositive line: "Judgment affirmed. No opinion." Because no opinion was issued, there is no step-by-step legal reasoning or discussion of applicable legal principles in the provided material. Holding and Implications Holding: Judgment affirmed. Implications: The direct, concrete effect of the court's disposition is that the judgment from the court below was upheld on appeal. Because the Court of Appeals issued no written opinion explaining its reasoning, the decision does not establish or explain new legal principles in the text provided. The entry therefore supplies no precedential analysis to guide future cases beyond the simple affirmance of the lower court's judgment between these parties. Additional Observations The short form of this entry—indicating how individual justices voted and concluding "Judgment affirmed. No opinion."—is itself the entirety of the recorded outcome in the provided text. No majority opinion, concurring opinion, or dissenting opinion is included beyond the notation of how the justices voted. Show full summary ... HOMER MANDEVILLE, Respondent, v. HENRY A. GUERNSEY, Appellant. For affirmance — CHURCH, Ch. J. ALLEN, PECKHAM and ANDREWS, JJ., concur. For reversal — GROVER, FOLGER and RAPALLO, JJ. Judgment affirmed. No opinion.