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.
Miss Helen MYER and Mrs. Emma Robin, Plaintiffs in Error, v. Miss Irma A. HALE, Defendant in Error, 1927 — 18 F.2d 1019 · caselaw · US
General
Miss Helen MYER and Mrs. Emma Robin, Plaintiffs in Error, v. Miss Irma A. HALE, Defendant in Error
18 F.2d 1019·United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·1927
Before WALKER, BRYAN, and FOSTER, Circuit Judges.
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
Miss Helen MYER and Mrs. Emma Robin, Plaintiffs in Error, v. Miss Irma A. HALE, Defendant in Error.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
April 18, 1927.
No. 4969.
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Mississippi; Edwin R. Holmes, Judge.
S. C. Mize, of Gulfport, Miss. (Mize & Mize & Thompson, of Gulfport, Miss., and Carl Marshall, of Bay St. Louis, Miss., on the brief), for plaintiffs in error.
John L. Heiss, of Gulfport, Miss., and W. L. Guiee, of Biloxi, Miss., for defendant in error.
Before WALKER, BRYAN, and FOSTER, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
The judgment is affirmed.