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 Heymann et al., 1937 — 302 U.S. 653 · caselaw · US
General
Ex parte Heymann et al.
302 U.S. 653·Supreme Court of the United States·1937
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. 13,
original.
Ex parte Heymann et al.
Argued November 11, 12, 1937.
Decided November 22, 1937.
Mr. Walter E. Wiles, with whom Mr. John M. Lee was on the brief, for petitioners. Mr. Irving H. Flamm, with whom Mr. Meyer Abrams was on the brief, for respondents.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Certio-rari, post, p. 663, to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
Per Curiam:
After hearing argument the Court is of the opinion that it does not appear from the record that the Circuit Court of Appeals abused its discretion in refusing leave to appeal. The writ of certiorari is accordingly dismissed.