Property · MBE-tested
WHITTEMORE v. CRAWFORD
266 F. 1024·United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia·1919
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
WHITTEMORE v. CRAWFORD.
(Court of Appeals of District of Columbia.
Submitted October 14, 1919.
Decided December 1, 1919.)
No. 3254.
Appeal from tbe Supreme Court of tbe District of Columbia.
Action by Maud B. Crawford against Sarah A. Whittemore. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
J. Wm. Shea and L. A. Bailey, both of Washington, D. C., for appellant. Thos. M. Baber, of Washington, D. C., for appellee.
Writ of error dismissed 254 U. S. —, 41 Sup. Ct. 6, 65 L. Ed. —.
[MAJORITY — ROBB, Associate Justice.]
ROBB, Associate Justice.
This is an appeal from a judgment in the Supreme Court of the District for the plaintiff, appellee here, under law rule 19 of that court, in a landlord and tenant proceeding instituted in the municipal court.
Since appellant relies solely upon the Saulsbury Resolution (40 Stat. 593), this ease is ruled by our decision in Willson v. McDonnell, 49 App. D. C. 280, 265 Fed. 432. The judgment is therefore affirmed, with costs.
Affirmed.