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.
Baruch SHAPIRO, etc., et al., Appellants, v. Roy C. LYLE, as Prohibition Administrator in Seattle, Washington, Appellee, 1930 — 36 F.2d 1021 · caselaw · US
General
Baruch SHAPIRO, etc., et al., Appellants, v. Roy C. LYLE, as Prohibition Administrator in Seattle, Washington, Appellee
36 F.2d 1021·United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·1930
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
Baruch SHAPIRO, etc., et al., Appellants, v. Roy C. LYLE, as Prohibition Administrator in Seattle, Washington, Appellee.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
February 3, 1930.
No. 5894.
John F. Dore, of Seattle, Wash., for appellants.
Anthony Savage, U. S. Atty., and Tom De Wolfe, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Seattle, Wash., for appellee.
Before RUDKIN, DIETRICH, and WILBUR, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Dismissed, upon stipulation of the parties. Mandate forthwith.