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.
Harry R. COLEMAN, Petitioner, v. DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON et al., Respondents, 1930 — 42 F.2d 1014 · caselaw · US
General
Harry R. COLEMAN, Petitioner, v. DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON et al., Respondents
42 F.2d 1014·United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·1930
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
Harry R. COLEMAN, Petitioner, v. DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON et al., Respondents.
No. 6202.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Sept. 18, 1930.
Before DIETRICH and WILBUR, Circuit Judges, and WEBSTER, District Judge.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
It appearing that the cause against petitioner has been set down for early hearing, the petition is dismissed.