South Bend v. DeHaven

302 U.S. 644, 58 S. Ct. 122
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided October 25, 1937·No. No. 434·Published·Cited by 2 cases

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

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

302 U.S. 644 (South Bend v. DeHaven) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Royal Indemnity v. Cardillo
302 U.S. 736 (Supreme Court, 1937)