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.
Woodward Cotton Company, Appellant, v. The City of Woodward et al., 1914 — 232 U.S. 716 · caselaw · US
General
Woodward Cotton Company, Appellant, v. The City of Woodward et al.
232 U.S. 716·Supreme Court of the United States·1914
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. 154.
Woodward Cotton Company, Appellant, v. The City of Woodward et al.
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Oklahoma.
Argued and submitted January 16, 1914.
Decided January 26, 1914.
Mr. John Devereux for the appellant. Mr. Webster Ballinger and Mr. Charles A. Loomis for the appellees.
[MAJORITY]
Per Curiam. Affirmed on the authority of Madera Water Works Company v. Madera, 228 U. S. 454; Memphis v. Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Company, 218 U. S. 624; Knoxville Water Company v. City of Knoxville, 200 U. S. 22, and Bienville Water Works Company v. City of Mobile, 175 U. S. 109, and cause remanded to the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Oklahoma.