Ohio ex rel. Eastman v. Stuart

Supreme Court

Ohio ex rel. Eastman v. Stuart

291 U.S. 643

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedFebruary 12, 1934

DocketNo. 740

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 291 U.S. 643 (Ohio ex rel. Eastman v. Stuart) 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

Ohio ex rel. Eastman v. Stuart, 291 U.S. 643 (1934).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The appeal herein is dismissed for the reason that the judgment sought here to be reviewed is based upon a non-federal ground adequate to support it. Yesler v. Washington Harbor Line Comm’rs, 146 U.S. 646, 657; Farson Son & Co. v. Bird, 248 U.S. 268, [644]*644271; Doyle v. Atwell, 261 U.S. 590; Howat v. Kansas, 258 U.S. 181, 189, 190; McCoy v. Shaw, 277 U.S. 302, 303.

Messrs. Erwin R. Effler, Rufus H. Baker, and Harold W. Fraser for appellant. Messrs. Frazier Reams and J. S. Rhinefort for appellees.

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 reason that the judgment sought here to be reviewed is based upon a non-federal ground adequate to support it. Yesler v. Washington Harbor Line Comm’rs, 146 U.S. 646, 657; Farson Son & Co. v. Bird, 248 U.S. 268, [644]*644271; Doyle v. Atwell, 261 U.S. 590; Howat v. Kansas, 258 U.S. 181, 189, 190; McCoy v. Shaw, 277 U.S. 302, 303.

Messrs. Erwin R. Effler, Rufus H. Baker, and Harold W. Fraser for appellant. Messrs. Frazier Reams and J. S. Rhinefort for appellees.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

291 U.S. 643, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ohio-ex-rel-eastman-v-stuart-scotus-1934.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack