Purcell v. New York Central R.

296 U.S. 545, 56 S. Ct. 173
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided November 11, 1935·No. No. 509·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The motion for leave to file statement as to jurisdiction is granted. The. appeal herein is dismissed for the want of a properly'presented [546] federal question. Home for Incurables v. City of New York, 187 U. S. 155, 158; Henkel v. Cincinnati, 177 U. S. 170; Seaboard Air Line Ry. v. Duvall, 225 U. S. 477, 481; Fullerton v. Texas, 196 U. S. 192, 193-194; Connecticut General Life Ins. Co. v. Johnson, ante, p. 535. The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.

Messrs. T. J. Johnston and Irving I. Goldsmith for appellant. Mr. Charles E. Nichols for appellee.

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

Purcell v. New York Central R., 296 U.S. 545, 56 S. Ct. 173 (1935).

296 U.S. 545 (Purcell v. New York Central R.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

National Fuel Gas Distribution Corp. v. Public Service Commission
97 A.D.2d 674 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)
Consumer Protection Board v. Public Service Commission
85 A.D.2d 321 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
Matter of Lefkowitz v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n
360 N.E.2d 918 (New York Court of Appeals, 1976)
Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. Public Service Commission
54 A.D.2d 255 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)
New York Telephone Co. v. Town of North Hempstead
86 Misc. 487 (New York Supreme Court, 1975)
Charleston Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Alderson
324 U.S. 182 (Supreme Court, 1945)
Honeyman v. Hanan
300 U.S. 14 (Supreme Court, 1937)