South Bend v. DeHaven

Supreme Court

South Bend v. DeHaven

302 U.S. 644, 58 S. Ct. 122

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedOctober 25, 1937

DocketNo. 434

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 302 U.S. 644 (South Bend v. DeHaven) 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

South Bend v. DeHaven, 302 U.S. 644, 58 S. Ct. 122 (1937).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from the Supreme Court of Indiana.

Per Curiam:

The motion of the appellees to dismiss the appeal is granted and the appeal is dismissed for the want of a properly presented substantial federal question. (1) Citizens’ Savings Bank v. Owensboro, 173 U. S. 636, 643; Cleveland & Pittsburgh R. Co. v. Cleveland, 235 U. S. 50, 53; White River Co. v. Arkansas, 279 U. S. 692, 700; Collins v. Streitz, 298 U. S. 640. (2) Pawhuska v. Pawhuska Oil & Gas Co., 250 U. S. 394; Trenton v. New Jersey, 262 U. S. 182; City of Holton v. Kansas State Bank, 300 U. S. 641.

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

Appeal from the Supreme Court of Indiana.

Per Curiam:

The motion of the appellees to dismiss the appeal is granted and the appeal is dismissed for the want of a properly presented substantial federal question. (1) Citizens’ Savings Bank v. Owensboro, 173 U. S. 636, 643; Cleveland & Pittsburgh R. Co. v. Cleveland, 235 U. S. 50, 53; White River Co. v. Arkansas, 279 U. S. 692, 700; Collins v. Streitz, 298 U. S. 640. (2) Pawhuska v. Pawhuska Oil & Gas Co., 250 U. S. 394; Trenton v. New Jersey, 262 U. S. 182; City of Holton v. Kansas State Bank, 300 U. S. 641.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

302 U.S. 644, 58 S. Ct. 122, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/south-bend-v-dehaven-scotus-1937.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack