A. M. Klemm & Son v. Winter Haven
309 U.S. 638, 60 S. Ct. 810
This text of 309 U.S. 638 (A. M. Klemm & Son v. Winter Haven) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
A. M. Klemm & Son v. Winter Haven, 309 U.S. 638, 60 S. Ct. 810 (1940).
Opinion
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Central Land Co v. Laidley, 159 U. S. 103, 112; Patterson v. Colorado, 205 U. S. 454, 460-461; Tidal Oil Co. v. Flanagan, 263 U. S. 444, 450.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Patterson v. Colorado Ex Rel. Attorney General of Colo.
205 U.S. 454 (Supreme Court, 1907)
Tidal Oil Co. v. Flanagan
263 U.S. 444 (Supreme Court, 1924)
Central Land Co. v. Laidley
159 U.S. 103 (Supreme Court, 1895)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
309 U.S. 638, 60 S. Ct. 810, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/a-m-klemm-son-v-winter-haven-scotus-1940.