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. H. LONG & CO., Inc., Appellant, v. Maurice CAMPBELL, Federal Prohibition Administrator for the Second District of New York, et al., Appellees; W. H. LONG & CO., Inc., Appellee, v. Maurice CAMPBELL, Federal Prohibition Administrator for the Second District of New York, and James M. Doran, Federal Prohibition Commissioner of the United States, Appellants, 1929 — 34 F.2d 645 · caselaw · US
General
W. H. LONG & CO., Inc., Appellant, v. Maurice CAMPBELL, Federal Prohibition Administrator for the Second District of New York, et al., Appellees; W. H. LONG & CO., Inc., Appellee, v. Maurice CAMPBELL, Federal Prohibition Administrator for the Second District of New York, and James M. Doran, Federal Prohibition Commissioner of the United States, Appellants
34 F.2d 645·United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·1929
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. H. LONG & CO., Inc., Appellant, v. Maurice CAMPBELL, Federal Prohibition Administrator for the Second District of New York, et al., Appellees. W. H. LONG & CO., Inc., Appellee, v. Maurice CAMPBELL, Federal Prohibition Administrator for the Second District of New York, and James M. Doran, Federal Prohibition Commissioner of the United States, Appellants.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
July 8, 1929.
Nos. 365, 366.
22 F.(2d) 913, followed. See, also, 28 F.(2d) 422.
Lewis Landes, of New York City, for plaintiff.
Charles H. Tuttle, U. S. Atty., of New York City (U. S. Grant, Asst. U. S. Atty., of New York City, of counsel), for defendants.
Before MANTON, L. HAND, and CHASE, Circuit Judges. ,
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
The decree in this case is affirmed as to the defendants’ appeal on the authority of Lion Laboratories v. Campbell, 34 F.(2d) 642, handed down herewith; as to the plaintiff’s appeal, on the authority of Higgins v. Mills, 22 F.(2d) 913, (C. C. A. 2).