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.
Snowden v. Hughes et al., 1943 — 319 U.S. 738 · caselaw · US
General
Snowden v. Hughes et al.
319 U.S. 738·Supreme Court of the United States·1943
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. 991.
Snowden v. Hughes et al.
June 7, 1943.
Messrs. William R. Ming, Jr. and Joseph E. Snowden for petitioner. Messrs. George F. Barrett, Attorney General of Illinois, and William C. Wines, Assistant Attorney General, for Edward J. Hughes et al.; and Mr. Isaac E. Ferguson for Robert E. Straus et ah, Co-Executors, — respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit granted.