Chan Pong v. United States

Ninth Circuit

Chan Pong v. United States

230 F. 1021, 1916 U.S. App. LEXIS 1521

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMarch 16, 1916

DocketNos. 2605, 2606

StatusPublished

This text of 230 F. 1021 (Chan Pong v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chan Pong v. United States, 230 F. 1021, 1916 U.S. App. LEXIS 1521 (9th Cir. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

In Error to the District Court of the United States for the First Division of the Northern District of California. George .T. Hatfield, of San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff in error. John W. Preston, U. S. Atty., and Caspar A. Ornbaum, Asst/U. S. Atty., both of San Francisco, Cal. Dismissed for noncompliance by plaintiff in error with rules 28 and 24 (150 Fed. xxxii, xxxiii, 79 O. C. A. xxxii, xxxiii) — failure of plaintiff in error to print record under rule 23, and to file a printed brief, under rule 24.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In Error to the District Court of the United States for the First Division of the Northern District of California. George .T. Hatfield, of San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff in error. John W. Preston, U. S. Atty., and Caspar A. Ornbaum, Asst/U. S. Atty., both of San Francisco, Cal. Dismissed for noncompliance by plaintiff in error with rules 28 and 24 (150 Fed. xxxii, xxxiii, 79 O. C. A. xxxii, xxxiii) — failure of plaintiff in error to print record under rule 23, and to file a printed brief, under rule 24.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

230 F. 1021, 1916 U.S. App. LEXIS 1521, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chan-pong-v-united-states-ca9-1916.