Smith v. Leavenworth
235 U.S. 690, 35 S. Ct. 205
Opinion
Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of (1) Rogers v. Jones, 214 U. S. 196, 204; Wood v. Chesborough, 228 U. S. 672, 677; (2) Castillo v. McConnico, 168 U. S. 674; de Bearn v. Safe Deposit Co., 233 U. S. 24, 34; McDonald v. Oregon Navigation Co., 233 U. S. 665, 670; (3) New Orleans Waterworks Co. v. Louisiana, 185 U. S. 336, 344; Gring v. Ives, 222 U. S. 365, 370; Ennis Water Works v. Ennis, 233 U. S. [691]*691652.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Smith v. Leavenworth, 235 U.S. 690, 35 S. Ct. 205 (1914).
235 U.S. 690 (Smith v. Leavenworth) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Castillo v. McConnico
168 U.S. 674 (Supreme Court, 1898)
New Orleans Waterworks Co. v. Louisiana
185 U.S. 336 (Supreme Court, 1902)
Rogers v. Jones
214 U.S. 196 (Supreme Court, 1909)
Gring v. Ives
222 U.S. 365 (Supreme Court, 1912)
Wood v. Chesborough
228 U.S. 672 (Supreme Court, 1913)
De Bearn v. Safe Deposit & Trust Co. of Baltimore
233 U.S. 24 (Supreme Court, 1914)
Ennis Water Works v. City of Ennis
233 U.S. 652 (Supreme Court, 1914)
McDonald v. Oregon Railroad & Navigation Co.
233 U.S. 665 (Supreme Court, 1914)