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.
Fuller Buggy Company, Appellant, v. Adelbert Waldron et al., Defendants, and Charles E. Cudney, Respondent, 1907 — 188 N.Y. 630 · caselaw · US
General
Fuller Buggy Company, Appellant, v. Adelbert Waldron et al., Defendants, and Charles E. Cudney, Respondent
188 N.Y. 630·New York Court of Appeals·1907·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
Fuller Buggy Company, Appellant, v. Adelbert Waldron et al., Defendants, and Charles E. Cudney, Respondent.
(Argued May 2, 1907;
decided May 21, 1907.)
Fuller Buggy Co. v. Waldron, 112 App. Div. 814, affirmed.
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered June 22,1906, affirming.a judgment in favor of respondent herein, entered upon a verdict directed by the court in an action to recover on a promissory note.
H. B. Spalding for appellant.
James A. Leary for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Oh. J., Gray, O’Brien, Yann, Werner, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ.