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.
Hall v. Johnson, Agent and Warden, 1902 — 186 U.S. 480 · caselaw · US
Torts · MBE-tested
Hall v. Johnson, Agent and Warden
186 U.S. 480·Supreme Court of the United States·1902
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
No. 576.
Hall v. Johnson, Agent and Warden.
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
Motions to dismiss or affirm submitted April 21, 1902.
Decided April 28, 1902.
Mr. Robert C. Taylor for the motions. Ma-charles Haldane and Mr. Frank S. Black opposing.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam,.]
Per Curiam,.
Order affirmed, with costs, on the authority of Storti v. Massachusetts, 183 U. S. 138, 141; Brown v. New Jersey, 175 U. S. 272; Andrews v. Swartz, 156 U. S. 272. See People v. Hall, 169 N. Y. 184.