Carter v. Short

308 U.S. 513, 60 S. Ct. 140
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided November 6, 1939·No. No. 396·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appéal is dismissed for want of a properly presented substantial federal question. (1) Godchaux Co. v. Estopinal, 251 U. S. 179; Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 261 U. S. 114, 117; Herndon v. Georgia, 295 U. S. 441, 443; (2) Compare Litchfield v. Register, 9 Wall. 575, 577-578; Minnesota v. Lane, 247 U. S. 243, 250; Lane v. Darling[514]*514ton, 249 U. S. 331, 333.

Messrs. John P. Bullington and Dillon Anderson for appellants. Messrs. H. Grady Chandler and Henry H. -Brooks for appellees.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Carter v. Short, 308 U.S. 513, 60 S. Ct. 140 (1939).

308 U.S. 513 (Carter v. Short) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Litchfield v. The Register and Receiver
76 U.S. 575 (Supreme Court, 1870)
Minnesota v. Lane
247 U.S. 243 (Supreme Court, 1918)
Lane v. Darlington
249 U.S. 331 (Supreme Court, 1919)
Godchaux Co. v. Estopinal
251 U.S. 179 (Supreme Court, 1919)
Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.
261 U.S. 114 (Supreme Court, 1923)
Herndon v. Georgia
295 U.S. 441 (Supreme Court, 1935)