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.
Martha E. Smith et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. Edward F. Brown, Receiver, etc., 1902 — 187 U.S. 637 · caselaw · US
General
Martha E. Smith et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. Edward F. Brown, Receiver, etc.
187 U.S. 637·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. 91.
Martha E. Smith et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. Edward F. Brown, Receiver, etc.
In error to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
Argued and submitted November 13, 1902.
Decided November 17, 1902.
Mr. Wm. M. Williams for the plaintiffs in error. Mr. William S. Shirk for the defendant in error.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on the authority of Studebaker v. Perry, 184 U. S. 258 McDonald v. Thompson, 184 U. S. 71; United States v. Knox, 102 U. S. 422, (see case below, Deweese v. Smith, 106 Fed. Rep. 438,) and case remanded to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Missouri.