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.
Hall et al. v. United States, 1875 — 91 U.S. 566 · caselaw · US
General
Hall et al. v. United States
91 U.S. 56623 L. Ed. 448·Supreme Court of the United States·1875
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
Hall et al. v. United States.
Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Minnesota.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Justice Clefeord]
Mr. Justice Clefeord
delivered the opinion of the court.
Suffice it tq ;say, that the suit in this case is in all material respects exactly similar to the foregoing ■ case, and that the pleadings filed by the defendants are precisely similar. It was commenced in the District Court; and the parties waived a jury, and the finding and judgment were for the plaintiffs. Exceptions were filed by the defendants, and they removed the cause into the Circuit-Court. All the questions in the Circuit Court were the same as in the preceding case; and the Circuit Court, ■having heard the parties, affirmed the judgment of the District Court-: whereupon the defendants sued out the'present writ of error. Due examination has since been given to the'case, and we find no error in the récord. Our reasons for the conclusion are given in the other case. Judgment affirmed.