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.
SOUTHERN SURETY COMPANY OF NEW YORK, Appellant, v. Daisy L. MARTIN, etc., et al., 1932 — 59 F.2d 1075 · caselaw · US
General
SOUTHERN SURETY COMPANY OF NEW YORK, Appellant, v. Daisy L. MARTIN, etc., et al.
59 F.2d 1075·United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth 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
SOUTHERN SURETY COMPANY OF NEW YORK, Appellant, v. Daisy L. MARTIN, etc., et al.
No. 9432.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
May 18, 1932.
Thomas J. Guthrie and Stuart S. Ball, both of Des Moines, Iowa, for appellant.
Tim J. Campbell, of Newton, Iowa, for appellees.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Motion of appellees to strike bill of exceptions sustained, and judgment affirmed, with costs.