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.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. KENDALL, 1927 — 20 F.2d 288 · caselaw · US
General
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. KENDALL
20 F.2d 288·United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia·1927
Before MARTIN, Chief Justice, and ROBB and VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justices.
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
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. KENDALL.
Court of Appeals of District of Columbia.
Submitted May 3, 1927.
Decided May 26, 1927.
No. 4545.
In Error to the Police Court" of the District of Columbia.
F. H. Stephens and E. W. Thomas, both of Washington, D. C., for plaintiff in error.
S. A. Syme, of Washington; D. C., for defendant in error.
Before MARTIN, Chief Justice, and ROBB and VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justices.
[MAJORITY — MARTIN, Chief Justice.]
MARTIN, Chief Justice.
It is agreed that the principles involved in this case are identical with those in No. 4544, District of Columbia, Plaintiff in Error, v. John D. Kendall, Defendant in Error, 57 App. D. C. - — , 20 F.(2d) 287, which has been dismissed by the court this day for want of jurisdiction.
Consistently therewith, the writ of error issued in this case is likewise dismissed.