Doucet v. Fontenot

Supreme Court

Doucet v. Fontenot

278 U.S. 561, 49 S. Ct. 28

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedOctober 22, 1928

DocketNo. 113

StatusPublished

This text of 278 U.S. 561 (Doucet v. Fontenot) 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

Doucet v. Fontenot, 278 U.S. 561, 49 S. Ct. 28 (1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The motion to dismiss is granted for the reason that under § 237 of the Judicial Code, as amended by the act of February. 13, 1925 (43 Stat. 936, 937),. the case is not properly before this Court on writ of .error. There is, -however, a federal question, as shown by Wadkins v. Producers Oil Co., 227 U. S. 368, and McCune v. Essig, 199 U. S. 382. and the proper method o.f review would be by application for a writ of certiorari. Treating the writ of error aá an application for certiorari the same is denied.

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

Per Curiam:

The motion to dismiss is granted for the reason that under § 237 of the Judicial Code, as amended by the act of February. 13, 1925 (43 Stat. 936, 937),. the case is not properly before this Court on writ of .error. There is, -however, a federal question, as shown by Wadkins v. Producers Oil Co., 227 U. S. 368, and McCune v. Essig, 199 U. S. 382. and the proper method o.f review would be by application for a writ of certiorari. Treating the writ of error aá an application for certiorari the same is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

278 U.S. 561, 49 S. Ct. 28, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doucet-v-fontenot-scotus-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack