Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Morris Vs. Duby

Morris vs Duby

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1926
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/94665

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
273 U.S. 641
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Morris

Respondent

Duby

Excerpt

morris v. duby - 273 u.s. 641 (1926) u.s. supreme court morris v. duby, 273 u.s. 641 (1926) 273 u.s. 641 no. 372. r. b. morris, doing business as morris and lowther, h. m. hewitt and lew nunamaker, etc., et al., appellants, v. william duby, h. b. van duzer, and w. h. malone, etc. * supreme court of the united states october 29, 1926 messrs. w. r. crawford and edwin c. ewing, both of seattle, wash., for appellant. mr. i. h. van winkle, of salem, or., for appellees. it is now here ordered, adjudged, and decreed by this court that the decree of the district court of the united states for the district of oregon, in this cause, be, and the same is hereby, vacated without costs to either party, and that this cause be, and the same is hereby, remanded to the said district court with directions to dismiss the bill of complaint on the ground that this case has become moot through the rescission of the assailed order of the oregon state highway commission, subject, however, to leave to the appellants to move for the vacation of this decree within thirty days herefrom if they question the rescission of such order. footnotes [ footnote * ] decree vacated 273 u.s. 651, 47 s. ct. 334, 71 l. ed. -.[ morris v. duby 273 u.s. 641 (1926) ]

Full Judgment

MORRIS v. DUBY - 273 U.S. 641 (1926)
U.S. Supreme Court MORRIS v. DUBY, 273 U.S. 641 (1926)

273 U.S. 641
No. 372.

R. B. MORRIS, doing business as Morris and Lowther, H. M. Hewitt and Lew Nunamaker, etc., et al., appellants,
v.
William DUBY, H. B. Van Duzer, and W. H. Malone, etc. *

Supreme Court of the United States

October 29, 1926

Messrs. W. R. Crawford and Edwin C. Ewing, both of Seattle, Wash., for appellant.

Mr. I. H. Van Winkle, of Salem, Or., for appellees.

It is now here ordered, adjudged, and decreed by this court that the decree of the District Court of the United States for the District of Oregon, in this cause, be, and the same is hereby, vacated without costs to either party, and that this cause be, and the same is hereby, remanded to the said District Court with directions to dismiss the bill of complaint on the ground that this case has become moot through the rescission of the assailed order of the Oregon State Highway Commission, subject, however, to leave to the appellants to move for the vacation of this decree within thirty days herefrom if they question the rescission of such order. Footnotes

[ Footnote * ] Decree vacated 273 U.S. 651, 47 S. Ct. 334, 71 L. Ed. -.[ Morris v. Duby 273 U.S. 641 (1926) ]



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial