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.
W. M. HARMER, et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY CO., Defendant in Error, 1926 — 17 F.2d 1014 · caselaw · US
General
W. M. HARMER, et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY CO., Defendant in Error
17 F.2d 1014·United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·1926
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
W. M. HARMER, et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY CO., Defendant in Error.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
December 20, 1926.)
No. 7462.
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the District of Minnesota.
John J. McCaughey, of Kasson, Minn., and John F. D. Meighen and Bennett O. Knudson, both of Albert Lea, Minn., for plaintiffs in error.
J. O. P. Wheelwright and Claude G. Krause, both of Minneapolis, Minn., for defendant in error.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Writ of error dismissed, without .costs to either party in this court, per stipulation of parties.