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.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. ONE CHRYSLER ROADSTER and W. M. Doughty, Jr., et al., Claimants, 1933 — 67 F.2d 903 · caselaw · US
General
UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. ONE CHRYSLER ROADSTER and W. M. Doughty, Jr., et al., Claimants
67 F.2d 903·United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·1933
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
UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. ONE CHRYSLER ROADSTER and W. M. Doughty, Jr., et al., Claimants.
No. 7027.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Dec. 5, 1933.
H. M. Holden, U. S. Atty., and M. S. MeCorquodale, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Houston, Tex.
Before BRYAN, SIBLEY1, and HUTCHESON, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — BRYAN, Circuit Judge.]
BRYAN, Circuit Judge.
This ease is controlled by our decision in United States V. James Stuart, 67 P.(2d) 902, this day decided. Accordingly, the judgment herein is reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.