Cady v. Detroit
309 U.S. 620, 60 S. Ct. 470
Opinion
The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. (1) Euclid v. Ambler, 272 U. S. 365; Cusack Co. v. Chicago, 242 U. S. 526; (2) Hatch v. Reardon, 204 U. S. 152, 160-161; Standard Food Co. v. Wright, 225 U. S. 540, 550; Warehouse Co. v. Tobacco Growers, 276 [621]*621U. S. 71, 88; (3) Caperton v. Boywer, 14 Wall. 216, 236-237; Herndon v. Georgia, 295 U. S. 441, 442-443.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cady v. Detroit, 309 U.S. 620, 60 S. Ct. 470 (1940).
309 U.S. 620 (Cady v. Detroit) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Square Lake Hills Condominium Ass'n v. Bloomfield Township
471 N.W.2d 321 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1991)
People v. McKendrick
468 N.W.2d 903 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1991)
State Treasurer v. Wilson
377 N.W.2d 703 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1985)
Moore v. City of Detroit
382 N.W.2d 482 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1985)
Butcher v. City of Detroit
347 N.W.2d 702 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1984)