Adams v. Park
283 U.S. 795, 51 S. Ct. 489
Opinion
The motion for leave to proceed further herein in forma pauperis is denied. The appeal is dismissed for the want of a substantial federal question. Malloy v. South Carolina, 237 U. S. 180, 183, 185; Wabash R. Co. v. Flannigan, 192 U. S. 29; Erie R. Co. v. Solomon, 237 U. S. 427; Zucht v. King, 260 U. S. 174; Sugarman v. United States, 249 U. S. 182; C. A. King & Co. v. Horton, 276 U. S. 600; Bank of Indianola v. Miller, 276 U. S. 605; Roe v. Kansas, 278 U. S. 191.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Adams v. Park, 283 U.S. 795, 51 S. Ct. 489 (1931).
283 U.S. 795 (Adams v. Park) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Wabash Railroad v. Flannigan
192 U.S. 29 (Supreme Court, 1904)
Malloy v. South Carolina
237 U.S. 180 (Supreme Court, 1915)
Erie Railroad v. Solomon
237 U.S. 427 (Supreme Court, 1915)
Sugarman v. United States
249 U.S. 182 (Supreme Court, 1919)
Zucht v. King
260 U.S. 174 (Supreme Court, 1922)
Roe v. Kansas Ex Rel. Smith
278 U.S. 191 (Supreme Court, 1929)