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.
John W. Enright et al., Petitioners, v. Arthur Yancey, 1916 — 241 U.S. 678 · caselaw · US
General
John W. Enright et al., Petitioners, v. Arthur Yancey
241 U.S. 678·Supreme Court of the United States·1916
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
No. 1001.
John W. Enright et al., Petitioners, v. Arthur Yancey.
June 12, 1916.
Mr. Grafton L. McGill'for ' the petitioners. Mr. John Dymond, Jr., and Mr. A. Griffen Levy for the respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.