Wall v. McNee

296 U.S. 547, 56 S. Ct. 177
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided November 18, 1935·No. No. 35·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

As appellants, de[548]*548fendants below, are not state officers within the meaning of § 266 of the Judicial Code (Spielman Motor Co. v. Dodge, 295 U. S. 89, 92; Ex parte Collins, 277 U. S. 565, 568; Ex parte Public National Bank, 278 U. S. 101, 104; School District No. 7 v. Hunnicut, 283 U. S. 810; Ex parte Everglades Drainage District, 293 U. S. 521; Everglades Drainage Dist. v. Florida Ranch & Dairy Corp., 74 F. (2d) 914, 915, 916; Rorick v. Everglades Drainage, 27 F. (2d) 377, 380, 381), the decree herein is reversed and the cause remanded to the District Court for further proceedings to be taken independently of § 266 of the Judicial Code, Gully v. Interstate Natural Gas Co., 292 U. S. 16, 18, 19.

Mr. H. E. Carter, Assistant Attorney General of Florida, with whom Mr. Cary D. Landis, Attorney General, and Mr. J. V. Keen, Assistant Attorney General, were on the brief, for appellants. Mr. D. C. Hull, with whom Messrs. Erskine W. Landis and Francis P. Whitehair were on the brief, for appellee. See 4 F. Supp. 496.

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

Wall v. McNee, 296 U.S. 547, 56 S. Ct. 177 (1935).

296 U.S. 547 (Wall v. McNee) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related