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.
Harry WARDMAN and Thomas P. Bones, Appellants, v. Walter S. HUTCHINS, Appellee, 1933 — 63 F.2d 893 · caselaw · US
General
Harry WARDMAN and Thomas P. Bones, Appellants, v. Walter S. HUTCHINS, Appellee
63 F.2d 893·United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit·1933
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
Harry WARDMAN and Thomas P. Bones, Appellants, v. Waiter S. HUTCHINS, Appellee.
No. 5608.
Court of Appeals of District of Columbia.
Argued Jan. 4, 1933.
Decided Feb. 6, 1933.
[MAJORITY — PEE CURIAM.]
PEE CURIAM.
The decision in this ease depends upon and is controlled by the decision in 62 App. D. C. 13, 63 F.(2d) 892, and it therefore follows that the judgment in this ease should be, and likewise is, affirmed.
Affirmed.