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.
Linville MILLER, Appellant, v. A. C. ADERHOLD, Warden, United States Penitentiary, Atlanta, Georgia, Appellee, 1932 — 61 F.2d 1035 · caselaw · US
General
Linville MILLER, Appellant, v. A. C. ADERHOLD, Warden, United States Penitentiary, Atlanta, Georgia, Appellee
61 F.2d 1035·United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·1932
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
Linville MILLER, Appellant, v. A. C. ADERHOLD, Warden, United States Penitentiary, Atlanta, Georgia, Appellee.
No. 6759.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Oct. 15, 1932.
Linville Miller, in pro. per.
Clint W. Hager, U. S. Atty., and Hal Lindsay, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Atlanta, Ga., for appellee.
Before BRYAN, SIBLEY, and WALKER, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
On the authority of Prussian v. United States, 282 U. S. 675, 51 S. Ct. 223, 75 L. Ed. 610, the judgment is affirmed.