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 O'Connor, Respondent, v. Peter Byrne, Appellant, 1905 — 180 N.Y. 556 · caselaw · US
General
William O'Connor, Respondent, v. Peter Byrne, Appellant
180 N.Y. 556·New York Court of Appeals·1905·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 O’Connor, Respondent, v. Peter Byrne, Appellant.
O’Gonnor v. Byrne, 86 App. Div. 627, affirmed.
(Argued January 27, 1905;
decided February 21, 1905.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered July 16, 1903, which reversed an order of the Onondaga County Court reversing a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of Syracuse in favor of plaintiff and affirmed the judgment of. the Municipal Court.
F. Devine for appellant.
Henry B. Buck for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Oh. J., Gray, O’Brien, Bartlett, Haight and Vann, JJ. Absent: Werner, J.