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.
Lloyd V. SHISSLER v. UNITED STATES of America, 1935 — 76 F.2d 1017 · caselaw · US
General
Lloyd V. SHISSLER v. UNITED STATES of America
76 F.2d 1017·United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit·1935
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
Lloyd V. SHISSLER v. UNITED STATES of America.
No. 5299.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
April 9, 1935.
See, also, 7 F. Supp. 123.
Leo D. Schein and Arthur R. Seelig, both of Chicago, Ill., for appellant.
Dwight H. Green and John S. Miller, both of Chicago, Ill., for the United States.
Before EVANS, SPARKS, and ALSCHULER, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
On motion of counsel for appellant, it is now here ordered, adjudged, and decreed by this court that this appeal be, and the same is hereby, affirmed.