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.
LOGAN v. FARMERS' DEPOSIT NATIONAL BANK OF PITTSBURGH, 1909 — 214 U.S. 500 · caselaw · US
Bankruptcy
LOGAN v. FARMERS' DEPOSIT NATIONAL BANK OF PITTSBURGH
214 U.S. 500·Supreme Court of the United States·1909
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
LOGAN v. FARMERS’ DEPOSIT NATIONAL BANK OF PITTSBURGH.
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTHS CIRCUIT..
No. 745.
Motion, to dismiss or affirm.
Submitted April 19, 1909.
Decided April 26, 1909.
An appeal from thé Circuit Court of Appeals in a bankruptcy matter , dismissed without opinion on authority of Coder v. Arts, 213 U. S. 223.
This case came up on motion to dismiss or affirm a final decree or judgment of the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth' Circuit modifying a decree of the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of West Virginia in the bankruptcy proceedings of the Morgantown Tin Plate Company and rejecting all of a claim of 1100,000, except 822,500.
Mr. B. M. Ambler and Mr. A. Leo Weil for the appellees in support of the motion.
' Mr. Hector M. Hitchings for the appellants in opposition thereto.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction on authority of Coder, Trustee, v. Arts, 213 U. S. 223.