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.
Odom et al. v. United States, 1941 — 313 U.S. 544 · caselaw · US
General
Odom et al. v. United States
313 U.S. 544·Supreme Court of the United States·1941
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. 827.
Odom et al. v. United States.
May 5, 1941.
Mr. Hall Etter for petitioners.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
The Solicitor General having confessed error, the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted, the petition for writ of certiorari is granted, the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the District Court for further proceedings.