RYAN v. TINSLEY

ResetAA Font size: Print

United States Supreme Court

KING v. KING, (1963)

No. 153

Argued:     Decided: October 14, 1963

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Reported below: 218 Ga. 534, 129 S. E. 2d 147.

Appellants pro se.

William K. Meadow and Robert B. Troutman for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.


RYAN v. TINSLEY, <a href="http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/375/17.html">375 U.S. 17 </a> (1963) 375 U.S. 17 (1963) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

RYAN v. TINSLEY, 375 U.S. 17 (1963)

375 U.S. 17

RYAN v. TINSLEY, WARDEN.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT.
No. 403, Misc.
Decided October 14, 1963.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Reported below: 316 F.2d 430.

Appellant pro se.

Duke W. Dunbar, Attorney General of Colorado, Frank E. Hickey, Deputy Attorney General, and John E. Bush, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied. [375 U.S. 17, 18]  

FindLaw Career Center


      Post a Job  |  View More Jobs

    View More