Gates v. Parmly

Supreme Court

Gates v. Parmly

191 U.S. 557, 24 S. Ct. 843

Supreme Court of the United States·Decided October 26, 1903·No. No. 37·Published

Opinion

In error to the Circuit Court of Clark County, State of Wisconsin.

Per Curiam.

Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Knox v. Exchange Bank, 12 Wall. 379; Central Land Company v. Laidley, 159 U. S. 103; New Orleans Water Works Co. v. Louisiana, 185 U. S. 336; California Powder Works v. Davis, 151 U. S. 389; Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company v. Louisville, 166 U. S. 709; Morley v. Lake Shore &c. Railway Company, 146 U. S. 162; Bacon [558]*558v. Texas, 163 U. S. 207.

Mr. Bvhlee A. Cole for plaintiff in error. Mr. A. B. Browne and Mr. Alexander Britton for defendants in- error.

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

In error to the Circuit Court of Clark County, State of Wisconsin.

Per Curiam.

Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Knox v. Exchange Bank, 12 Wall. 379; Central Land Company v. Laidley, 159 U. S. 103; New Orleans Water Works Co. v. Louisiana, 185 U. S. 336; California Powder Works v. Davis, 151 U. S. 389; Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company v. Louisville, 166 U. S. 709; Morley v. Lake Shore &c. Railway Company, 146 U. S. 162; Bacon [558]*558v. Texas, 163 U. S. 207.

Mr. Bvhlee A. Cole for plaintiff in error. Mr. A. B. Browne and Mr. Alexander Britton for defendants in- error.

Gates v. Parmly, 191 U.S. 557, 24 S. Ct. 843 (1903).

Pincite

191 U.S. 557 (Gates v. Parmly) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related