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.
Horace Hosley, Appellant, v. Niagara Falls Milling Company, Respondent, 1907 — 188 N.Y. 638 · caselaw · US
Torts · MBE-tested
Horace Hosley, Appellant, v. Niagara Falls Milling Company, Respondent
188 N.Y. 638·New York Court of Appeals·1907·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
Horace Hosley, Appellant, v. Niagara Falls Milling Company, Respondent.
(Argued May 8, 1907;
decided May 28, 1907.)
Hosley v. Niagara Falls Milling Co., 107 App. Div. 620, affirmed.
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered August 2, 1905, affirming a judgment- in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been occasioned through defendant’s negligence.
Forman D. Fish for appellant.
Clinton B. Gibbs for respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Judgment affirmed, with costs ; no opinion.
Concur: G-ray, O’Brien, Werner and Chase, JJ.
Dissenting: Vann and Willard Bartlett, JJ. Absent: Cullen, Oh. J.