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.
Richard Hynes, Appellant, v. Leo V. Youngworth, United States Marshal, etc.; and A. H. Hedderly, Appellant, v. Leo V. Youngworth, United States Marshal, etc., 1906 — 203 U.S. 602 · caselaw · US
General
Richard Hynes, Appellant, v. Leo V. Youngworth, United States Marshal, etc.; and A. H. Hedderly, Appellant, v. Leo V. Youngworth, United States Marshal, etc.
203 U.S. 602·Supreme Court of the United States·1906
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. 529.
No. 530.
Richard Hynes, Appellant, v. Leo V. Youngworth, United States Marshal, etc.; and A. H. Hedderly, Appellant, v. Leo V. Youngworth, United States Marshal, etc.
December 24, 1906.
No one opposing.
[MAJORITY]
Appeals from the Circuit Court of the
United States for the Southern District of California.
Docketed and dismissed with costs, on motion of The Solicitor General for the appellee.