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.
General
BAILEY v. WORK
154 U.S. 616·Supreme Court of the United States·1875
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
BAILEY v. WORK.
ERROR TO CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK.
No. 540.
Argued March 30, 1875.
Decided April 12, 1875.
Bailey- v. Glark, 21 Wall. 284, followed.
Mr. Attorney General for plaintiff in error.
■ Mr. J. E. Burrill for defendant in error.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Justice Field]
Mr. Justice Field
delivered the opinion of the court.
This ca.se involves the same question which was considered and determined in the case of Bailey v. Clark, 21 Wall. 284, just decided, and upon the authority of that case the judgment is
Affirmed.