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.
OULTON v. SAVINGS AND LOAN SOCIETY; CARY v. SAME; SAME v. GERMAN SAVINGS AND LOAN SOCIETY, 1875 — 154 U.S. 615 · caselaw · US
General
OULTON v. SAVINGS AND LOAN SOCIETY; CARY v. SAME; SAME v. GERMAN SAVINGS AND LOAN SOCIETY
154 U.S. 615·Supreme Court of the United States·1875
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
OULTON v. SAVINGS AND LOAN SOCIETY. CARY v. SAME. SAME v. GERMAN SAVINGS AND LOAN SOCIETY.
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA.
Nos. 169, 172 and 173.
Argued February 3, 1876.
Decided February 22, 1875.
Gary v. San Francisco Savings Union, 22 Wall. 38, followed.
Mr. Attorney General for plaintiffs in error.
Mr. H. J. Tilden and Mr. G. E. Whitehead for defendants in error.
[MAJORITY — Mr. Chief Justice Waite]
Mr. Chief Justice Waite
delivered the opinion of the court.
The material facts in these cases are the same as in Cary v. The San Francisco Savings Union, 22 Wall. 38, just decided. The judgments are all reversed for the reasons assigned in that case, and the causes are all remanded with instructions to render judgment in each of them for the defendant. Reversed.