Torts · MBE-tested
Charles SIDOTE, Plaintiff in Error, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant in Error
15 F.2d 1019·United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth 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
Charles SIDOTE, Plaintiff in Error, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant in Error.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
December 7, 1926.)
No. 4676.
In terror to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Ohio; Paul Jones, Judge.
Henry A. Pollack, of Cleveland, Ohio (Mooney, McCormack, Roth & Pollack, of Cleveland, Ohio, on the brief), for plaintiff in error.
Mr. John B. Osmun, Asst. U. S. A.tty., of Cleveland, Ohio (A. E. Bemsteen, of Cleveland, Ohio, on the brief), for the United States.
Before DENISON and MOORMAN, Circuit Judges, and HOUGH, District Judge.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. The counts for possession and sale were supported by substantial evidence; and the single sentence was permissible under these counts without reference to the nuisance count.