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.
Harry D. McCLEARY, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, 1933 — 64 F.2d 1016 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
Harry D. McCLEARY, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee
64 F.2d 1016·United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·1933
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
Harry D. McCLEARY, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
No. 7102.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
May. 16, 1933.
Smith, Mahan & Smith, of Helena, Mont., and Howard Toole and W. E. Moore, both of Missoula, Mont., for appellant.
Wellington D. Rankin, U. S. Atty., Sam D. Goza, Jr., and D. L. Egnew, Asst. U. S. Attys., and D. D. Evans, Chief Atty., U. S. Veterans’ Administration, all of Helena, Mont., for appellee.
Before WILBUR, SAWTELLE, and MACK, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Upon consideration of the record and briefs filed in above cause, and after oral argument of counsel for the respective parties, ordered judgment of the District Court in this cause affirmed upon the decision of this court in Falbo v. United States, No. 6965, 64 F.(2d) 948.