Auglaize Box Board Co. v. Hinton
This text of 254 U.S. 610 (Auglaize Box Board Co. v. Hinton) 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.
Opinion
Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio. Motion to dismiss or affirm submitted October 25, 1920. Decided November 8, 1920. Per Curiam. Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of: (1) California Powder Works v. Davis, 151 U. S. 389, 393; Cuyahoga River Power Co. v. Northern Realty Co., 244 U. [611]*611S. 300,303; Bilby v. Stewart, 246 U. S. 255, 257; Farson, Son & Co. v. Bird, 248 U. S. 268, 271. (2) Farrell v. O’Brien, 199 U. S. 89, 100; Goodrich v. Ferris, 214 U. S. 71, 79; Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry. Co. v. Maucher, 248 U. S. 359, 362; Berkman v. United States, 250 U. S. 114, 118. Mr. Earl H. Turner for plaintiff in error. Mr. J. H. Goeke, Mr. T. T. Ansberry and Mr. George T. Farrell for defendants in error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
254 U.S. 610, 41 S. Ct. 60, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/auglaize-box-board-co-v-hinton-scotus-1920.