KIRKPATRICK v. PREISLER

ResetAA Font size: Print

United States Supreme Court

NAVE v. CITY OF SEATTLE, (1967)

No. 767

Argued:     Decided: January 9, 1967

68 Wash. 2d 72, î 415 P.2d 93, appeal dismissed.

Footnotes

[ Footnote î ] ERRATA: "72" in "68 Wash. 2d 72" should be "721".

Appellant pro se.

A. L. Newbould for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. [385 U.S. 450, 451]  


KIRKPATRICK v. PREISLER, <a href="http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/385/450.html">385 U.S. 450 </a> (1967) 385 U.S. 450 (1967) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

KIRKPATRICK v. PREISLER, 385 U.S. 450 (1967)

385 U.S. 450

KIRKPATRICK, SECRETARY OF STATE OF MISSOURI, ET AL. v. PREISLER ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF
MISSOURI. No. 738.
Decided January 9, 1967.

257 F. Supp. 953, affirmed.

Norman H. Anderson, Attorney General of Missouri, and J. Gordon Siddens and Thomas J. Downey, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellants.

Paul W. Preisler, pro se, and for other appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE STEWART are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the case set for oral argument.

FindLaw Career Center


      Post a Job  |  View More Jobs

    View More