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.
Reaves v. Oliver, 1897 — 168 U.S. 704 · caselaw · US
General
Reaves v. Oliver
168 U.S. 704·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. 60.
Reaves v. Oliver.
Error to and appeal from the Supreme Court of the Territory of Oklahoma.
Submitted October 27, 1897.
Decided November 1, 1897.
[MAJORITY — Per Cuodam.]
Per Cuodam.
The order or decree sought to be reviewed was not final but interlocutory, and the writ of error and the appeal must be dismissed. Acts September 24,1789, c. 20, '§§ 13, 22,1 Stat. 81, 84; March 3, 1803, c. 40, 2 Stat.- 244; Rev. Stat. §§ 691, 692; Act March 3, 1891, c. 517, 26 Stat. 826; Forgay v. Conrad, 6 How. 201, 205 ; McLish v. Roff, 141 U. S. 661; American Construction Co. v. Jacksonville, Tampa &c. Railway, 148 U. S. 372, 378; Smith v. Vulcan Iron Works, 165 U. S. 518, 521.
Mr. Frank B. Crosthwaiie for plaintiff in error and appellant.