General
UNITED STATES of America, Appellant, v. Walter WOODALL, Appellee
75 F.2d 1020·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. Walter WOODALL, Appellee.
No. 7494.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
March 11, 1935.
Peirson M. Hall, U. S. Atty., and Hugh L. Dickson, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Los Angeles, Cal., and Will G. Beardslee, Director, Bureau of War Risk Litigation, and Keith L. Seegmiller and Lawrence A. Law-lor, Attys., Department of Justice, all of Washington, D. C., for the United States.
Volney P. Mooney, Jr., and Sylvester Hoffmann, both of Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee.
Before WILBUR, GARRECHT, and DENMAN, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
The record in this case is insufficient to raise the question of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment. Continental Nat. Bank v. National City Bank, 69 F.(2d) 312, 317. This is the only matter presented by appellant.
Judgment affirmed.