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 Howard B. Manington et al., Petitioners
220 U.S. 604·Supreme Court of the United States·1911
No one opposing.
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. —. Original.
Ex parte: In the Matter of Howard B. Manington et al., Petitioners.
Motion for leave to file petition submitted April 3, 1911.
Decided April 10, 1911.
Mr. B. W. McCoy and Mr. Smith W. Bennett for the petitioner.
No one opposing.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
Motion for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus denied. See Ex parte Harding, 219 U. S. 363, decided at this term.