Tananevicz v. Illinois

252 U.S. 568, 40 S. Ct. 346
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided March 15, 1920·No. No. 312·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of: (1) Consolidated Turnpike Co. v. Norfolk, etc., Ry. Co., 228 U. S. 326, 334; St. Louis & San Francisco R. R. Co. v. Shepherd, [569] 240 U. S. 240, 241; Bilby v. Stewart, 246 U. S. 255, 257. (2) Brolan v. United States, 236 U. S. 216, 218; United Surety Co. v. American Fruit Co., 238 U. S. 140, 142; Sugarman v. United States, 249 U. S. 182, 184. (3) Section 237 of the Judicial Code, as amended by the Act of September 6, 1916, c. 448, § 2, 39 Stat. 726.

Mr. Emory J. Smith tor plaintiff in error. Mr. Edward J. Brundage and Mr. Edward C. Fitch for defendant in error.

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

Tananevicz v. Illinois, 252 U.S. 568, 40 S. Ct. 346 (1920).

252 U.S. 568 (Tananevicz v. Illinois) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brolan v. United States
236 U.S. 216 (Supreme Court, 1915)
United Surety Co. v. American Fruit Product Co.
238 U.S. 140 (Supreme Court, 1915)
St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad v. Shepherd
240 U.S. 240 (Supreme Court, 1916)
Bilby v. Stewart
246 U.S. 255 (Supreme Court, 1918)
Sugarman v. United States
249 U.S. 182 (Supreme Court, 1919)