Stone v. Stone ex rel. Stone

Supreme Court

Stone v. Stone ex rel. Stone

245 U.S. 638, 38 S. Ct. 192

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedJanuary 21, 1918

DocketNo. 525

StatusPublished

This text of 245 U.S. 638 (Stone v. Stone ex rel. Stone) 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

Stone v. Stone ex rel. Stone, 245 U.S. 638, 38 S. Ct. 192 (1918).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Mr. Clyde A. Douglass, Mr. William C. Douglass, and Mr. Murray Alien for plaintiff in error. Mr. R. W. Winston and Mr. Moses N. Amis for defendant in error.

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of §237, Judicial Code, as amended by the Act of Congress of September 6, 1916, c. 448, 39 Stat. 726; Prairie Oil & Gas Co. v. Carter, 244 U. S. 646; Midland Valley R. R. Co. v. Griffith, ante, 633.

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

Per Curiam.

Mr. Clyde A. Douglass, Mr. William C. Douglass, and Mr. Murray Alien for plaintiff in error. Mr. R. W. Winston and Mr. Moses N. Amis for defendant in error.

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of §237, Judicial Code, as amended by the Act of Congress of September 6, 1916, c. 448, 39 Stat. 726; Prairie Oil & Gas Co. v. Carter, 244 U. S. 646; Midland Valley R. R. Co. v. Griffith, ante, 633.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

245 U.S. 638, 38 S. Ct. 192, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stone-v-stone-ex-rel-stone-scotus-1918.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack