CLIMATE CONTROL, INC. v. HILL

ResetAA Font size: Print

United States Supreme Court

CLIMATE CONTROL, INC. v. HILL, (1960)

No. 251

Argued:     Decided: November 14, 1960

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 86 Ariz. 180, 342 P.2d 854; 87 Ariz. 201, 349 P.2d 771.

William R. Meagher for appellant.

William W. Stevenson, Samuel H. Morris, Richard M. Fennemore, Daniel E. Cracchiolo, J. A. Riggins, Jr., Denison Kitchel, Francis J. Ryley, Ivan Robinette, Edward Jacobson, Howard Twitty, John R. Franks and Richard G. Kleindienst for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.


BOBO v. MAYOR & COUNCILMEN OF SAVANNAH BEACH, <a href="http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/364/409.html">364 U.S. 409 </a> (1960) 364 U.S. 409 (1960) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

BOBO v. MAYOR & COUNCILMEN OF SAVANNAH BEACH, 364 U.S. 409 (1960)

364 U.S. 409

BOBO v. MAYOR & COUNCILMEN OF SAVANNAH BEACH, GEORGIA.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA.
No. 409.
Decided November 14, 1960.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 216 Ga. 12, 114 S. E. 2d 374.

Erwin A. Friedman for appellant.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. [364 U.S. 409, 410]  

FindLaw Career Center


      Post a Job  |  View More Jobs

    View More