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.
The Roderick Lean Manufacturing Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Reinhart Kuelling, 1908 — 209 U.S. 540 · caselaw · US
General
The Roderick Lean Manufacturing Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Reinhart Kuelling
209 U.S. 540·Supreme Court of the United States·1908
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. 554.
The Roderick Lean Manufacturing Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Reinhart Kuelling.
Motion to dismiss, or affirm submitted March 9, 1908.
Decided March 16, 1908.
Mr. Sardius D. Bentley for plaintiff in- error.
Mr. Eugene Van Voorhis for defendant in error.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
In error to the Supreme Court of the State of New. York.
Writ of error dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Kansas City, Fort Scott & Memphis Railroad Company v. Daughtry, 138 U. S. 303; Fisk v. Henaril, 142 U. S. 459; McDonnell v. Jordan, 178 U. S. 229; Pennsylvania Company v. Bender, 148 U. S. 255; In re Pennsylvania Company, 137 U. S. 451; Wilson v. North Carolina, 169 U. S. 586, 595.