Carter v. Short

Supreme Court

Carter v. Short

308 U.S. 513, 60 S. Ct. 140

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedNovember 6, 1939

DocketNo. 396

StatusPublished

This text of 308 U.S. 513 (Carter v. Short) 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

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

Pincite

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

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

308 U.S. 513, 60 S. Ct. 140, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carter-v-short-scotus-1939.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack