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.
G. E. HERRON, Appellant, v. SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY, a Corporation, Appellee, 1931 — 50 F.2d 1078 · caselaw · US
Corporations
G. E. HERRON, Appellant, v. SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY, a Corporation, Appellee
50 F.2d 1078·United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·1931
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
G. E. HERRON, Appellant, v. SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY, a Corporation, Appellee.
No. 5948.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
May 29, 1931.
Dougherty & Rodgers and J. A. Walsh, all of Mesa, Ariz., for appellant.
Baker & Whitney, of Phœnix, Ariz., for appellee.
Before WILBUR and SAWTELLE, Circuit Judges, and NETERER, District Judge.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
The mandate (51 S. Ct. 383) of the Supreme Court of the United States answering certain questions certified having been ordered filed, and good cause therefor appearing, it is ordered that the judgment of the said District Court in this cause be, and hereby is, affirmed; mandate forthwith.