First National Bank v. Kehnast

Supreme Court

First National Bank v. Kehnast

241 U.S. 654, 36 S. Ct. 724, 60 L. Ed. 1223, 1916 U.S. LEXIS 1390

Supreme Court of the United States·Decided May 22, 1916·No. No. 333·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of (1) Eustis v. Bolles, 150 U. S. 361; Chemical National Bank v. City Bank of Portage, 160 U. S. 646; Leathe v. Thomas, 207 U. S. 93; Mellon v. McCafferty, 239 U. S. 134. (2) Leather Manufacturers’ Bank v. Cooper, 120 U. S. 778, 781; Whittemore v. Amoskeag National Bank, 134 U. S. 527; Petri v. Commercial National Bank of Chicago, 142 U. S. 644; Hermann v. Edwards, 238 U. S. 107.

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

Per Curiam.

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of (1) Eustis v. Bolles, 150 U. S. 361; Chemical National Bank v. City Bank of Portage, 160 U. S. 646; Leathe v. Thomas, 207 U. S. 93; Mellon v. McCafferty, 239 U. S. 134. (2) Leather Manufacturers’ Bank v. Cooper, 120 U. S. 778, 781; Whittemore v. Amoskeag National Bank, 134 U. S. 527; Petri v. Commercial National Bank of Chicago, 142 U. S. 644; Hermann v. Edwards, 238 U. S. 107.

First National Bank v. Kehnast, 241 U.S. 654, 36 S. Ct. 724, 60 L. Ed. 1223, 1916 U.S. LEXIS 1390 (1916).

Pincite

241 U.S. 654 (First National Bank v. Kehnast) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related