SEACAT MARINE DRILLING CO. v. BABINEAUX

ResetAA Font size: Print

United States Supreme Court

SEACAT MARINE DRILLING CO. v. BABINEAUX, (1965)

No. 283

Argued:     Decided: October 11, 1965

170 So.2d 518, appeal dismissed.

Marian Mayer Berkett for appellants.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. [382 U.S. 16, 17]  


BERRY v. STATE TAX COMMISSION, <a href="http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/382/16.html">382 U.S. 16 </a> (1965) 382 U.S. 16 (1965) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

BERRY v. STATE TAX COMMISSION, 382 U.S. 16 (1965)

382 U.S. 16

BERRY v. STATE TAX COMMISSION.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF OREGON.
No. 229.
Decided October 11, 1965.

241 Ore. 580, 397 P.2d 780, 399 P.2d 164, appeal dismissed.

Robert N. Gygi for appellant.

Robert Y. Thornton, Attorney General of Oregon, and John C. Mull and Carlisle B. Roberts, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

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

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.

FindLaw Career Center


      Post a Job  |  View More Jobs

    View More