General
SMITH v. UNITED STATES
255 F. 992·United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·1919
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
SMITH v. UNITED STATES.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
February 3, 1919.)
No. 3264.
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Fourth Division of the Territory of Alaska.
R. F. Roth, U. S. ,Atty., and Harry E. Pratt, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Fairbanks, Alaska, and Annette Abbott Adams, U. S. Atty., of San Francisco, Cal.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Motion for dismissal of writ of error for noncompliance by the plaintiff in error with the provisions of subdivision 1 of rule 16 of the Rules of Practice of this court (208 Fed. ix, 124 C. C. A. ix) granted, and writ of error dismissed.