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.
Charles Stumpf, Appellant, v. John Hallahan et al., Respondents, 1906 — 185 N.Y. 550 · caselaw · US
General
Charles Stumpf, Appellant, v. John Hallahan et al., Respondents
185 N.Y. 550·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
Charles Stumpf, Appellant, v. John Hallahan et al., Respondents.
Stumpf v. Hallahan, 101 App. Div. 383, affirmed.
(Argued April 23, 1906;
decided May 8, 1906.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered March 30, 1905, modifying, and affirming as modified, a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a verdict directed by the court in an action to recover a balance due upon a bond given for a loan secured by a mortgage upon certain real property.
Robert L. Harrison and William Byrd for appellant.
R. L. Weaver and M. J. Earley for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Cray, Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Vann, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ.