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.
Mackesy et al. v. Maine, 1938 — 305 U.S. 570 · caselaw · US
General
Mackesy et al. v. Maine
305 U.S. 570·Supreme Court of the United States·1938
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. 442.
Mackesy et al. v. Maine.
Decided November 21, 1938.
Mr. Albert Raymond Rogers for appellants.
Mr. Frank T. Powers entered an appearance for appellee.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
The appeal herein is dismissed for the want of a properly presented substantial federal question. (1) Harding v. Illinois, 196 U. S. 78, 86, 87; Capital City Dairy Co. v. Ohio, 183 U. S. 238, 248; (2) Nash v. United States, 229 U. S. 373, 377; Whitney v. California, 274 U. S. 357, 368, 369; Carter v. Texas, ante, p. 557.