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.
Solomon Ranger, Suing on his Own Behalf and on Behalf of All Other Bondholders of the Tennessee Central Railroad Company, Appellant, v. Ernst Thalmann et al., Composing the Firm of Ladenburg, Thalmann & Co., Respond, 1904 — 178 N.Y. 574 · caselaw · US
General
Solomon Ranger, Suing on his Own Behalf and on Behalf of All Other Bondholders of the Tennessee Central Railroad Company, Appellant, v. Ernst Thalmann et al., Composing the Firm of Ladenburg, Thalmann & Co., Respond
178 N.Y. 574·New York Court of Appeals·1904·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
Solomon Ranger, Suing on his Own Behalf and on Behalf of All Other Bondholders of the Tennessee Central Railroad Company, Appellant, v. Ernst Thalmann et al., Composing the Firm of Ladenburg, Thalmann & Co., Respond
Ranger v. Thalmann, 84 App. Div. 341, affirmed.
(Argued March 14, 1904;
decided March 29, 1904.)
Appeal, by permission, from a judgment entered June 19, 1903, upon an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, which reversed an interlocutory judgment of Special Term overruling a demurrer to the complaint. The following is the question certified: “ Does the amended complaint herein state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action ?
Thomas D. Adams and Arthur C. Palmer for appellant.
Edwvn C. Iloyt and Henry G. Wiley for respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion below, and question certified answered in the negative.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., Gray, O’Brien, Haight, Martin, Cullen and Werner, JJ.