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.
Joseph H. PRIMAKOW and Walter C. Rawles, Plaintiffs in Error, v. William C. HECHT, as United States Marshal, etc., Defendant in Error, 1925 — 7 F.2d 135 · caselaw · US
General
Joseph H. PRIMAKOW and Walter C. Rawles, Plaintiffs in Error, v. William C. HECHT, as United States Marshal, etc., Defendant in Error
7 F.2d 135·United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·1925
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
Joseph H. PRIMAKOW and Walter C. Rawles, Plaintiffs in Error, v. William C. HECHT, as United States Marshal, etc., Defendant in Error.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
February 20, 1925.
No. 235.
In Error to and Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
Appeal from order dismissing writ of habeas corpus entered in the District Court for the Southern District of New York.
B. P. Siegelstein, of New York City, for appellants.
William Hayward, TJ. S. Atty., of New York City (Moses Polakoff, Asst. U. S. Atty., of New York City, of counsel), opposed.
Before HOUGH, MANTON, and HAND, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Order (7 F.[2d] 133) affirmed.