Holmes v. City of Fayetteville

Supreme Court

Holmes v. City of Fayetteville

281 U.S. 700, 50 S. Ct. 353

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedMay 5, 1930

DocketNo. 674

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 281 U.S. 700 (Holmes v. City of Fayetteville) 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

Holmes v. City of Fayetteville, 281 U.S. 700, 50 S. Ct. 353 (1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The appeal herein is dismissed for the want of a substantial federal question. Yamhill Electric Co. v. City of McMinnville, 280 U. S. 531; Wabash R. R. Co. v. Flannigan, 192 U. S. 29; Erie R. R. Co. v. Solomon, 237 U. S. 427; Zucht v. King, 260 U. S. 174; Sugarman v. United States, 249 U. S. 182; C. A. King Co. v. Horton, 276 U. S. 600; Bank of Indianola v. Miller, 276 U. S. 605; Roe v. Kansas, 278 U. S. 191.

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

Per Curiam:

The appeal herein is dismissed for the want of a substantial federal question. Yamhill Electric Co. v. City of McMinnville, 280 U. S. 531; Wabash R. R. Co. v. Flannigan, 192 U. S. 29; Erie R. R. Co. v. Solomon, 237 U. S. 427; Zucht v. King, 260 U. S. 174; Sugarman v. United States, 249 U. S. 182; C. A. King Co. v. Horton, 276 U. S. 600; Bank of Indianola v. Miller, 276 U. S. 605; Roe v. Kansas, 278 U. S. 191.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 U.S. 700, 50 S. Ct. 353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holmes-v-city-of-fayetteville-scotus-1930.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack