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.
BERGER v. TRACY, 1910 — 215 U.S. 594 · caselaw · US
General
BERGER v. TRACY
215 U.S. 594·Supreme Court of the United States·1910
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
BERGER v. TRACY.
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OP THE STATE OP IOWA.
No. 97.
Submitted January 21, 1910.
Decided January 24, 1910.
A writ of error to review judgment of the highest court of a State dismissed for want of jurisdiction, on authority of Castillo v. Mc Connico, 168 U. S. 674; no Federal question was suggested prior to petition for writ of error.
Writ of error to review 135 Iowa, 597, dismissed.
Mr. Chester C. Cole for plaintiff in error.
No appearance for defendant in error.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
Writ of error dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Castillo v. McConnico, 168 U. S. 674. No Federal question suggested prior to petition for writ of error. Case below, 135 Iowa, 597.