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.
James S. Hopkins, as Receiver, etc., Plaintiff in Error, v. United States of America, Suing for the Use and Benefit of Ellington & Guy (Inc.) et al., 1918 — 246 U.S. 655 · caselaw · US
General
James S. Hopkins, as Receiver, etc., Plaintiff in Error, v. United States of America, Suing for the Use and Benefit of Ellington & Guy (Inc.) et al.
246 U.S. 655·Supreme Court of the United States·1918
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. 598.
James S. Hopkins, as Receiver, etc., Plaintiff in Error, v. United States of America, Suing for the Use and Benefit of Ellington & Guy (Inc.) et al.
In error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of North Carolina.
Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted March 25, 1918.
Decided April 15, 1918.
Mr. Mark W. Brown and Mr. Albert J. Hopkins for plaintiff in error.
Mr. A. B. Dickinson for defendants in error.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
Judgment affirmed with costs upon the authority of United States v. Congress Construction Co., 222 U. S. 199.