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.
Rodley v. People of the State of California, 1901 — 183 U.S. 694 · caselaw · US
General
Rodley v. People of the State of California
183 U.S. 694·Supreme Court of the United States·1901
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. 296.
Rodley v. People of the State of California.
Motions to dismiss or affirm submitted November 4, 1901.
Decided November 11, 1901.
Mr. Tirey L. Ford and Mr. C. N. Post for the motions. Mr. George D. Collins, opposing.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Error to the Supreme Court of the State of California.
Per Curiam.
Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction on the authority of Caldwell v. Texas, 137 U. S. 692; Oxley Stave Company v. Butler County, 166 U. S. 648; Powell v. Brunswick County, 150 U. S. 433.