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.
Woey Ho, Appellant, v. United States, 1903 — 191 U.S. 558 · caselaw · US
General
Woey Ho, Appellant, v. United States
191 U.S. 558·Supreme Court of the United States·1903
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. 52.
Woey Ho, Appellant, v. United States.
Argued November 3, 1903.
Decided November 9, 1903.
Mr. Franklin H. Mackey for appellant.
The Attorney General and Mr. Assistant Attorney General McBeynolds for appellee.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Appeal from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Per Curiam.
Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Lau Ow Bew v. United States, 144 U. S. 47, 58; Cross v. Burke, 146 U. S. 82, 88; In re Lennon, 150 U. S. 393; Perrine v. Slack, 164 U. S. 452; The Paquete Habana, 175 U. S. 677, 683.