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.
Baldwin, Guardian, v. County Commissioners of Washington County, 1897 — 168 U.S. 705 · caselaw · US
General
Baldwin, Guardian, v. County Commissioners of Washington County
168 U.S. 705·Supreme Court of the United States·1897
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. 370.
Baldwin, Guardian, v. County Commissioners of Washington County.
Error to the Court of Appeals of the State pf Maryland.
Submitted November 1, 1897.
Decided November 8, 1897.
Mr. Henry Kyd Douglas for motion to dismiss.
Mr. Charles A. Boston opposing.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction on the authority of Oxley Stave Company v. Butler County, 166 U. S. 648; Eustis v. Bolles, 150 U. S. 361, and cases cited.