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.
Indiana ex rel. Mavity v. Tyndall et al. and Pacific Employers Insurance Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission et al., 1948 — 333 U.S. 834 · caselaw · US
General
Indiana ex rel. Mavity v. Tyndall et al. and Pacific Employers Insurance Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission et al.
333 U.S. 834·Supreme Court of the United States·1948
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
February 16, 1948.
No. 545.
No. 557.
Indiana ex rel. Mavity v. Tyndall et al. and Pacific Employers Insurance Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission et al.
C. James McLemore for relator in No. 545.
W. N. Mullen for appellant in No. 557.
Donald E. Wachhorst for Humphreys, appellee in No. 557.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
The appeals are dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: No. 545, 225 Ind. 360, 74 N. E. 2d 914; No. 557, 81 Cal. App. 2d 37, 183 P. 2d 344.