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.
Fannie E. UNTERMYER, as Executrix, and Edward D. Untermyer, as Executor, etc., Plaintiffs in Error, v. Charles W. ANDERSON, as Collector, etc., Defendant in Error, 1927 — 18 F.2d 1023 · caselaw · US
General
Fannie E. UNTERMYER, as Executrix, and Edward D. Untermyer, as Executor, etc., Plaintiffs in Error, v. Charles W. ANDERSON, as Collector, etc., Defendant in Error
18 F.2d 1023·United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·1927
Before MANTON and SWAN, Circuit Judges, and CAMPBELL, District Judge.
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
Fannie E. UNTERMYER, as Executrix, and Edward D. Untermyer, as Executor, etc., Plaintiffs in Error, v. Charles W. ANDERSON, as Collector, etc., Defendant in Error.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
April 12, 1927.
No. 382.
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
Louis Marshall, of New York City, for plaintiffs in error.
Thos. J. Crawford, of New York City, for defendant in error.
Before MANTON and SWAN, Circuit Judges, and CAMPBELL, District Judge.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Judgment affirmed in open court.