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.
Minnesota Moline Plow Company et al., Petitioners, v. Dowagiac Manufacturing Company, 1902 — 187 U.S. 644 · caselaw · US
General
Minnesota Moline Plow Company et al., Petitioners, v. Dowagiac Manufacturing Company
187 U.S. 644·Supreme Court of the United States·1902
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. 476.
Minnesota Moline Plow Company et al., Petitioners, v. Dowagiac Manufactueing Company.
November 3, 1902.
Mr. Charles M. Peek and Mr. Lysamder Hill for the petitioners. Mr. George A. Prevost, Mr. J. H. Whitaker and Mr. Fred L. Chappell for the respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Petition, for a writ of certiorari tó the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.