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.
Kansas Farmers Union Royalty Co. et al. v. Shaffer, Executor, et al., 1938 — 303 U.S. 623 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Kansas Farmers Union Royalty Co. et al. v. Shaffer, Executor, et al.
303 U.S. 623·Supreme Court of the United States·1938
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. 366.
Kansas Farmers Union Royalty Co. et al. v. Shaffer, Executor, et al.
Argued February 2, 1938.
Decided March 7, 1938.
Mr. L. E. Clevenger, with whom Messrs. B. I. Litowich and S. H. King were on the brief, for appellants. Mr. D. M. McCarthy, Kathryn O’Loughlin McCarthy, and Mr. Oscar Ostrum were on the brief for appellees.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
As it appears, after hearing argument, that there is no properly presented federal question, the motion of the appellants to reinstate the case for further consideration is denied and the appeal is dismissed. Clarke v. McDade, 165 U. S. 168, 172; Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co. v. McDonald, 214 U. S. 191, 193; Hiawassee Power Co. v. Carolina-Tenn. Co., 252 U. S. 341, 343; Witzelberg v. Cincinnati, 302 U. S. 635.