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.
Maurice J. Halleran, Appellant, v. The Bell Telephone Company of Buffalo, Respondent, 1903 — 177 N.Y. 533 · caselaw · US
General
Maurice J. Halleran, Appellant, v. The Bell Telephone Company of Buffalo, Respondent
177 N.Y. 533·New York Court of Appeals·1903·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
Maurice J. Halleran, Appellant, v. The Bell Telephone Company of Buffalo, Respondent.
Salieran v. Bell Telephone Co., 64 App. Div. 41, affirmed.
(Argued December 3, 1903;
decided December 18, 1903.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme . Court in the fourth judicial .department, entered August 13, 1901, affirming a judgment in fav.or of defendant entered -upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term without a jury.
Arthur F. Clark for appellant.
John G. Milburn and Frank E. Whaley for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Oh. J., Gray, O’Brien, Bartlett, Martin, Cullen and Werner, JJ.