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.
Samuel SPEARS, Receiver of the Properties of the San Benito Land & Water Company et al., Appellants, v. Brice FRAZIER and his Wife, Daisy Frazier, Appellees, 1925 — 4 F.2d 1010 · caselaw · US
General
Samuel SPEARS, Receiver of the Properties of the San Benito Land & Water Company et al., Appellants, v. Brice FRAZIER and his Wife, Daisy Frazier, Appellees
4 F.2d 1010·United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·1925
Before WALKER and BRYAN, Circuit Judges, and DAWKINS, District Judge.
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
Samuel SPEARS, Receiver of the Properties of the San Benito Land & Water Company et al., Appellants, v. Brice FRAZIER and his Wife, Daisy Frazier, Appellees.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
February 4, 1925.)
No. 4328.
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Texas; Joseph C. Hutcheson, Judge.
Sam Streetman and J. L. Lockett, Jr., both of Houston, Tex. (Samuel Spears, of San Benito, Cal., and Sam Streetman and Andrews, Streetman, Logue and Mobley, all of Houston, Tex., on the brief), for appellants.
J. C. George, of Brownsville, Tex. (J. C. George, Seabury, George & Taylor, and Graham, Jones, Williams & Ransome, all of Brownsville, Tex., on the brief), for appellees.
Before WALKER and BRYAN, Circuit Judges, and DAWKINS, District Judge.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
For reasons sufficiently stated in the opinion rendered by the District Judge (4 F.[2d] 1007), the decree appealed from is affirmed.