Polk Co. v. Mayo
299 U.S. 507, 57 S. Ct. 39
Opinion
The motion for leave to amend the statement as to jurisdiction is granted. The appeal is dismissed for the want of a substantial federal question. Gundling v. Chicago, 177 U. S. 183, 188; Payne v. Kansas, 248 U. S. 112; Arnold v. Hanna, 276 U. S. 591; cf. Sligh v. Kirkwood, 237 U. S. 52, 61, 62.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Polk Co. v. Mayo, 299 U.S. 507, 57 S. Ct. 39 (1936).
299 U.S. 507 (Polk Co. v. Mayo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Silver Rose Entertain. v. Clay County
646 So. 2d 246 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
Moore v. Thompson
126 So. 2d 543 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1960)
Kelly v. Blackburn
95 So. 2d 260 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1957)
Henderson v. Antonacci
62 So. 2d 5 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1952)