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.
Rat Portage Lumber Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Minnesota; Lesure Lumber Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Minnesota, 1911 — 220 U.S. 606 · caselaw · US
General
Rat Portage Lumber Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Minnesota; Lesure Lumber Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Minnesota
220 U.S. 606·Supreme Court of the United States·1911
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. 120.
Rat Portage Lumber Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Minnesota; Lesure Lumber Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. The State of Minnesota.
and No. 121.
Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Minnesota.
Argued April 11, 1911.
Decided April 17, 1911.
Mr. R. R. Briggs and Mr. M. H. Stanford for the plaintiffs in error.
Mr. George T. Simpson, Mr. C. S. Jelley and Mr. Clifford L. Hilton for the defendant in error.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. First National Bank v. Estherville, 215 U. S. 341, 346; Rogers v. Clark Iron Co., 217 U. S. 589; Farrell v. O’Brien, 199 U. S. 100; Griffith v. Connecticut, 218 U. S. 563, 571; St. Paul Gas Light Co. v. St. Paul, 181 U. S. 142, 151.