Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Messrs. Lynn Helm, Edward C. Bailey, Henry T. Lee, J. R. Scott, and Charles W. Chase for plaintiff in error.
Messrs. W. B. Mathews and Herbert J. Goudge for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice Day delivered the opinion of the court:
This case is practically determined by views expressed in Dobbins v. Los Angeles,
It is therefore ordered that the judgment of the Supreme Court of California be reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with the views announced in the Dobbins Case, supra.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Citation: 195 U.S. 242
No. 108
Decided: November 14, 1904
Court: United States Supreme Court
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)