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.
Samuel A. V. Hartwell, Appellant, v. John H. Havighorst, 1904 — 196 U.S. 635 · caselaw · US
General
Samuel A. V. Hartwell, Appellant, v. John H. Havighorst
196 U.S. 635·Supreme Court of the United States·1904
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. 106.
Samuel A. V. Hartwell, Appellant, v. John H. Havighorst.
Appeal from the Supreme Court of the Territory of Oklahoma.
Argued December 15, 1904.
Decided December 19, 1904.
Case reported below 11 Oklahoma, 189, and
see Paine v. Foster, 9 Oklahoma, 213, 257; Acers v. Snyder, 8 Oklahoma, 659.
Mr. William C. Prentiss for appellant.
Mr. A. G. C. Bierer for appellee.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
Decree affirmed with costs. Johnson v. Towsley, 13 Wall. 72; Marquez v. Frisbie, 101 U. S. 473; Quinby v. Conlan, 104 U. S. 420; Gardner v. Bonestell, 180 U. S. 362; Potter v. Hall, 189 U. S. 292; Payne v. Robertson, 169 U. S. 323;