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.
General
El Paso Sash and Door Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. E. M. Carraway
245 U.S. 643·Supreme Court of the United States·1918
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. 369.
El Paso Sash and Door Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. E. M. Carraway.
In error to the Court of Civil Appeals for the Eighth Supreme Judicial District of the State of Texas.
Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted January 28, 1918.
Decided February 4, 1918.
Mr. Charles B. Braún for plaintiff in error.
Mr. Frank G. Morris for defendant in error.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of (1) McCorquodole v. Texas, 211 U. S. 432, 437; Waters-Pierce Oil Co. v. Texas, 212 U. S. 112, 118; Kansas City Star Co. v. Julian, 215 U. S. 589; St. Louis & San Francisco Ry. Co. v. Shepherd, 240 U. S. 240, 241; (2) Miller v. Cornwall R. R. Co., 168 U. S. 131, 134; Harding v. Illinois, 196 U. S. 78, 84 et seq.; Bowe v. Scott, 233 U. S. 658, 664, 665.