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.
ROBERTS v. BOLLES, 1881 — 154 U.S. 670 · caselaw · US
General
ROBERTS v. BOLLES
154 U.S. 67038 L. Ed. 1093·Supreme Court of the United States·1881
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
ROBERTS v. BOLLES.
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS.
No. 48.
Submitted October 20, 1881.
Decided October 25, 1881.
Boberts v. Bolles, 101 Ú. S. 119, followed.
Mr. Andreio J. Bell for plaintiff in error.
Mr. George O. Ide for defendants in error.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Chief Justice Waite]
Mr. Chief Justice Waite
delivered the opinion of the court.
The judgment in this case is affirmed on the authority of Roberts v. Bolles, 101 U. S. 119, which we see no reason for reconsidering. Affirmed.