Reuter v. Wisconsin ex rel. Department of Agriculture
314 U.S. 571, 62 S. Ct. 76
Opinion
The motion for leave to file statement of jurisdiction is granted. The motion to dismiss is also granted, and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. (1) Highland Farms Dairy v. Agnew, 300 U. S. 608, 612; (2) Nebbia v. New York, 291 U. S. 502; Borden’s Co. v. Ten Eyck, 297 U. S. 251; United States v. Rock Royal Co-op., 307 U. S. 533, 562-71; Central Lumber Co. v. South Dakota, 226 U. S. 157.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Reuter v. Wisconsin ex rel. Department of Agriculture, 314 U.S. 571, 62 S. Ct. 76 (1941).
314 U.S. 571 (Reuter v. Wisconsin ex rel. Department of Agriculture) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Central Lumber Co. v. South Dakota
226 U.S. 157 (Supreme Court, 1912)
Nebbia v. New York
291 U.S. 502 (Supreme Court, 1934)
BORDEN’S FARM PRODUCTS CO., INC. v. TEN EYCK, COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE & MARKETS OF NEW YORK, Et Al.
297 U.S. 251 (Supreme Court, 1936)
Highland Farms Dairy, Inc. v. Agnew
300 U.S. 608 (Supreme Court, 1937)
United States v. Rock Royal Co-Operative, Inc.
307 U.S. 533 (Supreme Court, 1939)