REYNOLDS v. LA. BOARD OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL

ResetAA Font size: Print

United States Supreme Court

TIETZ v. MARIENTHAL, (1966)

No. 217

Argued:     Decided: October 10, 1966

238 Cal. App. 2d 905, 48 Cal. Rptr. 245, appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

J. B. Tietz for appellants.

Harold W. Kennedy and Henry F. Walker 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.


REYNOLDS v. LA. BOARD OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL, <a href="http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/385/8.html">385 U.S. 8 </a> (1966) 385 U.S. 8 (1966) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

REYNOLDS v. LA. BOARD OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL, 385 U.S. 8 (1966)

385 U.S. 8

REYNOLDS, DBA LARRY & KATZ, ET AL. v. LOUISIANA BOARD OF ALCOHOLIC
BEVERAGE CONTROL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA. No. 229.
Decided October 10, 1966.

248 La. 639, 181 So.2d 377, appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Saul Stone and Paul O. H. Pigman for appellants.

George A. Bourgeois, Clem H. Sehrt and Peter J. Butler for appellee.

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. [385 U.S. 8, 9]  

FindLaw Career Center


      Post a Job  |  View More Jobs

    View More