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.
HUMPHREYS et al. v. LOVE, Superintendent of Banks, et al., 1932 — 61 F.2d 908 · caselaw · US
General
HUMPHREYS et al. v. LOVE, Superintendent of Banks, et al.
61 F.2d 908·United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit·1932
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
HUMPHREYS et al. v. LOVE, Superintendent of Banks, et al.
No. 6815.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Nov. 23, 1932.
Alfred Stoner, of Greenwood, Miss., and Mareellus Green, Gamer W. Green, and F. B. Jackson, all of Jackson, Miss., for appellants.
Ward Allen and W. M. Hamner, both of Greenwood, Miss., J. L. Roberson and Sam C. Cook, Jr., both of Clarksdale, Miss., and J. N. Flowers, of Jackson, Miss., for appel-lees.
Before BRYAN, SIBLEY, and WALKER, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
This appeal was taken from an order remanding the case to the state court in which it originated upon a bill in equity.
A motion is now made to dismiss on the ground that under 28 USCA § 71 an appeal does not lie. On the ground stated, the appeal is dismissed.