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
Ex parte: In the Matter of America Capo, Petitioner
231 U.S. 739·Supreme Court of the United States·1913
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. 8. Original.
Ex parte: In the Matter of America Capo, Petitioner.
On petition for writ of mandamus.
Argued November 10, 11, 1913.
Decided November 17, 1913.
Mr. Frederic D. McKenney and Mr. F. H. Dexter for the petitioner. Mr. Malcolm Donald, Mr. Charles Hartsell and Mr. M. Rodriguez-Serra for the respondent.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The rule to show cause hitherto allowed is discharged arid the petition for the allowance of the writ of mandamus is dismissed, and the prayer for the writ consequently denied. Ex parte Harding, 219 U. S. 363.