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.
J. A. Scriven Company, Appellant, v. Rice-Stix Dry Goods Company, 1911 — 223 U.S. 708 · caselaw · US
General
J. A. Scriven Company, Appellant, v. Rice-Stix Dry Goods Company
223 U.S. 708·Supreme Court of the United States·1911
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. 299.
J. A. Scriven Company, Appellant, v. Rice-Stix Dry Goods Company.
Appeal from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
Motion to dismiss submitted October 18, 1911.
Decided October 23, 1911.
Mr. Arthur v. Briesen and Mr. Hans v. Briesen for the appellant. Mr. F. W. Lehmann and Mr. S. L. Smarts for the appellee.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Farrell v. O’Brien, 199 U. S. 100; David Kaufman & Sons Co. v. Smith, 216 U. S. 610; § 6 of act of March 3, 1891, chap. 517, 26 Stat. 828. And see Hutchinson, Pierce & Co. v. Loewy, 217 U. S. 457.