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.
MINERAL POINT v. LEE, 1867 — 154 U.S. 552 · caselaw · US
General
MINERAL POINT v. LEE
154 U.S. 552·Supreme Court of the United States·1867
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
MINERAL POINT v. LEE.
ERROR, TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN.
No. 164.
Submitted April 18, 1867.
Decided April 22, 1867.
Affirmed on the authority of several cases of a similar character.
The case is stated in the opinion.
No appearance for plaintiff in error.
Mr. M. H. Carpenter for defendant in error.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Chief Justice Chase]
Mr. Chief Justice Chase
delivered the opinion of the court.
The action in the court below was brought to recover the amount of certain coupons issued by the town of Mineral Point of which Lee, the plaintiff below, was the holder. We think it unnecessary to repeat the views heretofore expressed in several eases of similar character. The judgment is affirmed with costs.