Witzelberg v. Cincinnati
This text of 302 U.S. 635 (Witzelberg v. Cincinnati) 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.
Opinion
Appeal from the Supreme Court of Ohio.
The motion of the appellees to dis[636]*636miss the appeal is granted and the appeal is dismissed (1) for the want of a properly presented federal question. Clarke v. McDade, 165 U. S. 168, 172; Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co. v. McDonald, 214 U. S. 191, 193; Hiawassee Power Co. v. Carolina-Tenn. Co., 252 U. S. 341, 343; (2) for the want of a substantial federal question, Ballard v. Hunter, 204 U. S. 241, 262; North Laramie Land Co. v. Hoffman, 268 U. S. 276, 283.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
302 U.S. 635, 58 S. Ct. 22, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/witzelberg-v-cincinnati-scotus-1937.