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.
UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Louis TABACK and George Wenger, Defendants-Appellants, 1929 — 32 F.2d 1020 · caselaw · US
General
UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Louis TABACK and George Wenger, Defendants-Appellants
32 F.2d 1020·United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·1929
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
UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Louis TABACK and George Wenger, Defendants-Appellants.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
May 20, 1929.
No. 283.
Emily Holt, of New York City, and Frederic M. P. Pearse, of Newark, N. J. (Daniel W. Applegate, of Newark, N. J., on the brief), for appellants.
Charles H. Tuttle, U. S. Atty., of New York City (Lowell Wadmond, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Brooklyn, N. Y., of counsel), for the United States.
Before MANTON, SWAN, and AUGUSTUS N. HAND, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Judgment -affirmed.