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.
Edwin S. Hartwell Lumber Company, Petitioner, v. The United States; and John Spry Lumber Company, Petitioner, v. The United States, 1906 — 201 U.S. 644 · caselaw · US
General
Edwin S. Hartwell Lumber Company, Petitioner, v. The United States; and John Spry Lumber Company, Petitioner, v. The United States
201 U.S. 644·Supreme Court of the United States·1906
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. 610.
Edwin S. Hartwell Lumber Company, Petitioner, v. The United States; and John Spry Lumber Company, Petitioner, v. The United States.
No. 611.
March 19, 1906.
Petitions for writs of certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
Mr. Jacob Newman, Mr. Salmon 0. Levinson and Mr. Benjamin V. Becker for petitioners.
The Attorney General and The Solicitor General for respondent.