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.
Roscoe C. ZUCKERMAN, Appellant, v. Frank H. HOOD, an Individual and J. B. Schwag and J. W. Glenn, Individually and as Copartners Doing Business under the Firm Name and Style of Fred Schwab Commission Co., Appellees, 1930 — 37 F.2d 1016 · caselaw · US
General
Roscoe C. ZUCKERMAN, Appellant, v. Frank H. HOOD, an Individual and J. B. Schwag and J. W. Glenn, Individually and as Copartners Doing Business under the Firm Name and Style of Fred Schwab Commission Co., Appellees
37 F.2d 1016·United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·1930
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
Roscoe C. ZUCKERMAN, Appellant, v. Frank H. HOOD, an Individual and J. B. Schwag and J. W. Glenn, Individually and as Copartners Doing Business under the Firm Name and Style of Fred Schwab Commission Co., Appellees.
No. 5897.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Feb. 4, 1930.
Percy S. Webster, of Stockton, Cal., and David Livingston, of San Francisco, Cal., for appellant.
Charles M. Fryer, of San Francisco, Cal., for appellee.
Before RUDKIN, DIETRICH, and WILBUR, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Decree affirmed.