Home/Supreme Court/Jumer v. Smith

Jumer v. Smith

279 U.S. 825, 49 S. Ct. 514, 73 L. Ed. 978, 1929 U.S. LEXIS 102
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedJune 3, 1929
DocketNo. 931
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 279 U.S. 825 (Jumer v. Smith) 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
Jumer v. Smith, 279 U.S. 825, 49 S. Ct. 514, 73 L. Ed. 978, 1929 U.S. LEXIS 102 (1929).

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The motion for leave to proceed further herein in forma pauperis. is denied for the reason that the' Court, upon examination [826]*826of the unprinted record herein submitted, finds that there is no jurisdiction for the appeal, which is therefore dismissed. Treating the appeal as an application for certiorari, the same is denied. The costs already incurred herein, by direction of the Court shall be paid by the clerk from the special fund in his custody as provided in the order of October 29, 1926.

Barbara J. Jumer, pro se. No appearance for respondents.

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

Related

People v. Davis
290 N.W.2d 366 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1980)
United States v. Dorothy R. Garber
607 F.2d 92 (Fifth Circuit, 1979)
Complaint of Flota Mercante Grancolombiana, S.A.
440 F. Supp. 704 (S.D. New York, 1977)
United States v. Herbert R. Jacobs
475 F.2d 270 (Second Circuit, 1973)
United States v. Cogan
266 F. Supp. 374 (S.D. New York, 1967)
United States v. Charles Gersh, Anthony Mugnola and Peter Yuastella
328 F.2d 460 (Second Circuit, 1964)
Lawrence Bernardo v. Bethlehem Steel Company
314 F.2d 604 (Second Circuit, 1963)
United States v. Mississippi Valley Barge Line Company, Mississippi Valley Barge Line Company v. United States Fo America
285 F.2d 381 (Eighth Circuit, 1960)
United States v. Bowles
183 F. Supp. 237 (D. Maine, 1958)
Calhoun v. Superior Court
291 P.2d 474 (California Supreme Court, 1955)
Maurice D. Scanlon v. United States
223 F.2d 382 (First Circuit, 1955)
United States v. Jones
204 F.2d 745 (Seventh Circuit, 1953)
Norwitt v. United States
195 F.2d 127 (Ninth Circuit, 1952)
Waterman S. S. Corp. v. United States Smelting, Refining & Mining Co.
155 F.2d 687 (Fifth Circuit, 1946)
The Vale Royal
51 F. Supp. 412 (D. Maryland, 1943)
In Re Columbia Ribbon Co.
117 F.2d 999 (Third Circuit, 1941)
People v. Purcell
26 N.E.2d 153 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1940)
United States v. Los Angeles Soap Co.
83 F.2d 875 (Ninth Circuit, 1936)
Venezuelan Meat Export Co. v. United States
12 F. Supp. 379 (D. Maryland, 1935)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
279 U.S. 825, 49 S. Ct. 514, 73 L. Ed. 978, 1929 U.S. LEXIS 102, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jumer-v-smith-scotus-1929.