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
UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. Krikor H. TOROSIAN, Appellee
75 F.2d 1021·United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·1935
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
UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. Krikor H. TOROSIAN, Appellee.
No. 7824.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
April, 1935.
Peirson M. Hall, U. S. Atty., and Ernest D. Fooks, Atty., Department of Justice, both of Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant.
Alvin Gerlack, of San Francisco, Cal., for appellee.
Before WILBUR, GARRECHT, and DENMAN, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Upon stipulation of counsel for respective parties, ordered appeal dismissed; mandate forthwith.