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
John G. McCullough et al., Appellants and Respondents, v. The Broad Exchange Company et al., Respondents and Appellants
184 N.Y. 592·New York Court of Appeals·1906·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
John G. McCullough et al., Appellants and Respondents, v. The Broad Exchange Company et al., Respondents and Appellants.
McCullough v. Broad Exchange Co., 101 App. Div. 566, affirmed.
(Argued March 16, 1906;
decided April 3, 1906.)
Cross-appeals from a judgment of the Appellate Division' of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered March 17, 1905, modifying and affirming as modified a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon the report of a referee.
Austen G. Fox, Edward R. Greene and Winfred T. Denison for plaintiffs, appellants and respondents.
Edward E. Sprague for defendants, respondents and appellants.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, without 'costs to either party; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Vann, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ.