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.
SCHWARTZ v. ADAMS; WEINER v. ADAMS, 1913 — 228 U.S. 592 · caselaw · US
General
SCHWARTZ v. ADAMS; WEINER v. ADAMS
228 U.S. 592·Supreme Court of the United States·1913
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
SCHWARTZ v. ADAMS. WEINER v. ADAMS.
APPEALS FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO.
Nos. 240, 241.
Submitted April 21, 1913.
Decided May 12, 1913.
Decided on authority of preceding case.
The facts are stated in the opinion.
Mr. Joshua Freeman Grozier and Mr. John A. Dewee se for appellant.
Mr. Assistant Attorney General Harr for appellee.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Justice Holmes.]
Mr. Justice Holmes.
In .accordance with a stipulation of counsel the same judgment will be entered in the above cases as in Bugajewiiz v. Adams, ante, p. 585.
Judgments affirmed.