Valdes Vs. Munich

Valdes vs Munich

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1909

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/90758

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/90758
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: 1909
Case Number: 212 U.S. 568
Subject: Narcotics

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Narcotics

Key legal issue: Narcotics

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Valdes

Respondent

Munich

Excerpt

valdes v. munich - 212 u.s. 568 (1909) u.s. supreme court valdes v. munich, 212 u.s. 568 (1909) 212 u.s. 568 ramon valdes, plaintiff in error, v. ventura munich no. 457. ramon valdes, plaintiff in error, v. o. m. wood no. 473. ramon valdes, plaintiff in error, v. maria venega perianes no. 474. supreme court of the united states february 1, 1909 page 212 u.s. 568, 569 messrs. f. kingsbury curtis, john g. carlisle, and henry a. stickney for plaintiff in error. mr. willis sweet for defendants in error. per curiam: writs of error dismissed for want of jurisdictional amounts. act of april 12, 1900, chap. 191, 31 stat. at l. 77, 34, 35; act of march 2, 1901, chap. 812, 31 stat. at l. 953, 3; royal ins. co. v. martin, 192 u.s. 149, 159 , 48 s. l. ed. 385, 388, 24 sup. ct. rep. 247; ortega v. lara, 202 u.s. 339 , 50 l. ed. 1055, 26 sup. ct. rep. 707; perez v. fernandez, 202 u.s. 80 , 50 l. ed. 942, 26 sup. ct. rep. 561; garrozi v. dastas, 204 u.s. 64, 73 , 51 s. l. ed. 369, 376, 27 sup. ct. rep. 224.

Full Judgment

VALDES v. MUNICH - 212 U.S. 568 (1909)
U.S. Supreme Court VALDES v. MUNICH, 212 U.S. 568 (1909)

212 U.S. 568

RAMON VALDES, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
VENTURA MUNICH
No. 457.

RAMON VALDES, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
O. M. WOOD

No. 473.

RAMON VALDES, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
MARIA VENEGA PERIANES

No. 474.

Supreme Court of the United States

February 1, 1909

Page 212 U.S. 568, 569

Messrs. F. Kingsbury Curtis, John G. Carlisle, and Henry A. Stickney for plaintiff in error.

Mr. Willis Sweet for defendants in error.

Per Curiam: Writs of Error dismissed for want of jurisdictional amounts. Act of April 12, 1900, chap. 191, 31 Stat. at L. 77, 34, 35; act of March 2, 1901, chap. 812, 31 Stat. at L. 953, 3; Royal Ins. Co. v. Martin, 192 U.S. 149, 159 , 48 S. L. ed. 385, 388, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 247; Ortega v. Lara, 202 U.S. 339 , 50 L. ed. 1055, 26 Sup. Ct. Rep. 707; Perez v. Fernandez, 202 U.S. 80 , 50 L. ed. 942, 26 Sup. Ct. Rep. 561; Garrozi v. Dastas, 204 U.S. 64, 73 , 51 S. L. ed. 369, 376, 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 224.

Same Parties Valdes vs Munich Same Subject Narcotics