HEALY v. RATTA(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) ]