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.
Moody Bible Institute v. Chicago, 1943 — 320 U.S. 705 · caselaw · US
General
Moody Bible Institute v. Chicago
320 U.S. 705·Supreme Court of the United States·1943
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. 95.
Moody Bible Institute v. Chicago.
October 11, 1943.
Mr. Howard F. Bishop for appellant. Messrs. Barnet Hodes, Joseph F. Grossman, and J. Herzl Segal for appellee.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. § 237 (a) of the Judicial Code, as amended, 28 U. S. C., § 344 (a). Treating the papers whereon the appeal was allowed as an application for writ of certiorari as required by § 237 (c) of the Judicial Code, as amended, 28 U. S. C., § 344 (c), certiorari is denied.