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.
J. T. THOMAS and Pearl Thomas v. UNITED STATES, 1925 — 11 F.2d 1019 · caselaw · US
General
J. T. THOMAS and Pearl Thomas v. UNITED STATES
11 F.2d 1019·United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit·1925
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
J. T. THOMAS and Pearl Thomas v. UNITED STATES.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
November 12, 1925.)
No. 4401.
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Tennessee ; Xenophon Hicks, Judge.
Hobart F. Atkin, of Knoxville, Tenn., for plaintiffs in error.
George C. Taylor, U. S. Atty., and Wilbur W. Piper, Asst. U. S. Atty., both, of Knoxville, Tenn.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
Judgment of the District Court reversed, and cause remanded for further proceeding according to law.