HEALY v. RATTA 288 U.S. 593 (1933)

United States Supreme Court

HEALY v. RATTA (1933)

No. 669

Decided: February 20, 1933

Mr. Thornton Lorimer, of Rochester, N. H., for appellant.

Mr. William N. Rogers, of Concord, N. H., for appellee.

For opinion below, see 1 F. Supp. 669.

In this case probable jurisdiction is noted. The Court desires to hear argument upon the questions: (a) whether a case for equitable relief is shown; (b) whether the amount in controversy is such as to sustain the jurisdiction of the Court below; and (c) whether the defendant-appellant is a state officer within the meaning of section 266, Judicial Code, as amended (43 Stat. 936, 938, U. S. Code, title 28, 380 [28 USCA 380]). The motion to advance is granted and the case is assigned for argument on Monday, March 13, next, after the cases heretofore assigned for that day.[ Healy v. Ratta 288 U.S. 593 (1933) ]

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network