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.
EX PARTE LOUD, 1872 — 154 U.S. 582 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
EX PARTE LOUD
154 U.S. 582·Supreme Court of the United States·1872
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
EX PARTE LOUD.
ORIGINAL.
No. 8.
Original.
Argued January 26, 1872.
Decided March 25, 1872.
Ex parte MeNiel, 13 Wall. 236, followed.
Petition of a writ of prohibition to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of New York. The case is stated in the opinion.
Mr. C. Donohue for petitioner.
Mr. F. A. Wilcox for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Justice Swayne]
Mr. Justice Swayne
delivered the opinion of the court.
This ease differs in no material particular from the case of the like application by Alexander MeNiel just decided, 13 Wall. 236. The same considerations apply, and the result must be the same.
The application is denied and the petition dismissed.