Los Angeles v. Los Angeles County Flood Control District

305 U.S. 564, 59 S. Ct. 104, 83 L. Ed. 356, 1938 U.S. LEXIS 608
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedOctober 17, 1938
DocketNo. 368
StatusPublished

This text of 305 U.S. 564 (Los Angeles v. Los Angeles County Flood Control District) 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
Los Angeles v. Los Angeles County Flood Control District, 305 U.S. 564, 59 S. Ct. 104, 83 L. Ed. 356, 1938 U.S. LEXIS 608 (1938).

Opinion

Appeal from the Supreme Court of California.

The mo[565]*565tion to dismiss the appeal is granted as to the City of Los Angeles, and as to it the appeal is dismissed for the want of a substantial federal question. Pawhuska v. Pawhuska Oil & Gas Co., 250 U. S. 394; Trenton v. New Jersey, 262 U. S. 182; Williams v. Mayor, 289 U. S. 36, 40; South Bend v. DeHaven, 302 U. S. 644. As to the remaining appellant, further consideration of the question of the jurisdiction of this Court and of the motion to dismiss or affirm is postponed to the merits.

Messrs. Ray L. Chesebro, Frederick von Schrader, William H. Neal, and Bourke Jones for appellants. Messrs. W. B. McKes-son and U. T. Clotfelter for appellees.

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

Related

City of Pawhuska v. Pawhuska Oil & Gas Co.
250 U.S. 394 (Supreme Court, 1919)
City of Trenton v. New Jersey
262 U.S. 182 (Supreme Court, 1923)
Williams v. Mayor of Baltimore
289 U.S. 36 (Supreme Court, 1933)
South Bend v. DeHaven
302 U.S. 644 (Supreme Court, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
305 U.S. 564, 59 S. Ct. 104, 83 L. Ed. 356, 1938 U.S. LEXIS 608, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/los-angeles-v-los-angeles-county-flood-control-district-scotus-1938.