General
Laskey W. JOHNSON, Plaintiff in Error, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Defendant in Error; Evva M. HERRON, Plaintiff in Error, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Defendant in Error
37 F.2d 448·United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit·1929
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
Laskey W. JOHNSON, Plaintiff in Error, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Defendant in Error. Evva M. HERRON, Plaintiff in Error, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Defendant in Error.
Court of Appeals of District of Columbia.
Argued November 4, 1929.
Decided December 2, 1929.
Nos. 5013, 5014.
Paul E. Lesh, of Washington, D. C., for plaintiff in error.
W. W. Bride and F. H. Stephens, both of Washington, D. C., for defendant in error.
Before MARTIN, Chief Justice, and ROBB and VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justices.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
These are writs of error to the municipal court, and involve an interpretation of the Act of June 4,1924 (43 Stat. 367). Since the facts in these cases do not differ materially from the facts in District of Columbia v. Newman (No. 4803) 59 App. D. C. 163, 37 F.(2d) 444, decided February 25, 1929, in which an application for rehearing has this day been denied, the judgments in these eases are affirmed, with costs, on the authority of that case.
Affirmed, with costs.