Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub

Mr. W. W. Scott for appellant.

November 8, 1920. Per Curiam: DisAssistant Attorney General Davis for missed for want of jurisdiction upon the appellee.

authority of November 8, 1920. Per Curiam: Af- (1) Reetz v. Michigan, 188 U. S. 505, firmed upon the authority of Jackson v. 508, 47 L. ed. 563, 566, 23 Sup. Ct. Rep. United States, 230 U. S. 1, 57 L. ed. 1363, 390; United States v. Heinze, 218 U. S. 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1011; Hughes v. Unit- 532, 545, 546, 54 L. ed. 1139, 1145, 31 ed States, 230 V. S. 24, 57 L. ed. 1374, Sup. Ct. Rep. 98, 21 Ann. Cas. 884; 46 L.R.A.(N.S.) 624, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. Lott v. Pittman, 243 U. S. 588, 591, 61 1019; Cubbins v. Mississippi River Com- | L. ed. 915, 916, 37 Sup. Ct. Rep. 473; mission, 241 U. S. 351, 60 L. ed. 1041, Ex parte Abdu, 247 Ú. S. 27, 30, 62 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 671.

L. ed. 966, 967, 38 Sup. Ct. Rep. 447.

(2) Castillo v. McConnico, 168 U. S. 674, 683, 42 L. ed. 622, 625, 18 Sup. Ct.

Rep. 229; Standard Oil Co. v. Missouri, AUGLAIZE Box BOARD COMPANY, Plain- 224 U. S. 270, 281, 56 L. ed. 760, 767,

tiff in Error, v. BESSIE Hinton, etc., 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 406, Ann. Cas. 1913D, et al. [No. 217.)

936; McDone!d v. Oregon R. & Nav. Co. Error to state court-Federal question. 233 U. S. 665, 669, 670, 58 L. ed. 1145,

In Error to the Supreme Court of the 1148, 1149, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 772; GasState of Ohio.

quet v. Lapeyre, 242 U. S. 367, 369, 370, See same case below, 100 Ohio St. 505, 61 L. ed. 367, 370, 37 Sup. Ct. Rep. 165. 126 N. E. 881.

Mr. Earl H. Turner for plaintiff in error.

Messrs. J. H. Goeke and T. T. Ans- JESSE 0. Starr et al., Plaintiffs in Erberry for defendants in error. November 8, 1920. Per Curiam: Dis

ror, v. STATE OF NEw MEXICO. (No.

80.1 missed for want of jurisdiction upon the Error to state court-Federal question. authority of (1) California Powder Works v. Da- State of New Mexico.

In Error to the Supreme Court of the vis, 151 U. S. 389, 393, 38 L. ed. 206, 207,

See same case below, 24 N. M.180, 173 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 350; Cuyahoga River

Pac. 674. Power Co. v. Northern Realty Co. 244 U.

[612] Mr. H. B. Holt for plaintiffs in S. 303, 61 L. ed. 1157, 37 Sup. Ct. Rep. 643; [611] Bilby v. Stewart, 246 U. S.

Messrs. H. S. Bowman and A. B. Ren255, 257, 62 L. ed. 701, 702, 38 Sup. Ct.

ehan for defendant in error. Rep. 264; Farson, Son & Co. v. Bird, 248 U. S. 268, 271, 63 L. ed. 233, 235, 39 Sup. Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon

November 15, 1920. Per Curiam: Ct. Rep. 111. (2) Farrell v. O'Brien (O’Callaghan Co. 191 U. Š. 526, 530, 48 L. ed. 287, 290,

the authority of Spencer v. Duplan Silk v. O'Brien) 199 U. S. 89, 100, 50 L. ed. 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 174; Hull v. Burr, 234 101, 107, 25. Sup. Ct. Rep. 727; Goodrich v. Ferris, 214 U. S. 71, 79, 53 L. ed. U. S. 712, 720, 58 L. ed. 1557, 1561, 34 914, 917, 29 Sup. Ct. Rep. 580; Chicago, al, 225 U. S. 561, 569, 56 L. ed. 1205,

Sup. Ct. Rep. 892; Shulthis v. McDougR. I. & P. R. Co. v. Maucher, 218 U. S. 1210, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 704; Norton v. 359, 362, 63 L. ed. 294, 296, 39. Sup. ct

. Whiteside, 239 U. S. 144, 147, 60 L. ed. Rep. 108; Berkman v. United States, 250 U. S. 114, 118, 63 L. ed. 877, 881, 39 186, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 97. Sup. Ct. Rep. 411.

error.

STATE OF LOUISIANA EX REL. THOMAS J. SHELDON DOLE LEMAN et al., Executors, DUGGAN, etc., Plaintiff in Error, v. A.

etc., Plaintiffs in Error, v. SIDNEY C. W. CRANDELL, Register of the State EASTMAN, Trustee, etc., et al. (No. Land Office. [No. 81.1 306.]

Error to state court-Federal question. Error to state court-Federal question. In Error to the Supreme Court of the

In Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana. State of Illinois.

See same case below, 144 La. 22, 80 Mr. Henry W. Leman for plaintiffs in So. 185. error.

Mr. Henry H. Glassie for plaintiff in Messrs. Salmon 0. Levinson, Sidney error. C. Eastman, Benjamin V. Becker, and Mr. Paul A. Sompayrac for defendant Car! V. Wisner for defendants in error. in error.

[ocr errors]

November 15, 1920. Per Curiam: (1) California Powder Works v. DaDismissed for want of jurisdiction upon vis, 151 U. S. 389, 393, 38 L. ed. 206, the authority of

207, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 350; Gaar, S. & (1) Spencer v. Duplan Silk Co. 191 Co. v. Shannon, 223 U. S. 468, 470, 56 U. S. 526, 530, 48 L. ed. 287, 290, 24 L. ed. 510, 512, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 236; Sup. Ct. Rep. 174; Hull v. Burr, 234 U. Cuyahoga River Power Co. v. Northern s. 712, 720, 58 L. ed. 1557, 1561, 34 Sup. Realty Co. 244 U. S. 300, 303, 61 L. ed. Ct. Rep. 892; Shulthis v. McDougal, 225 1153, 1157, 37 Sup. Ct. Rep. 643; Bilby U. S. 561, 569, 56 L. ed. 1205, 1210, 32 v. Stewart, 246 U. S. 255, 257, 62 L. ed. Sup. Ct. Rep. 704; Norton v. Whiteside, 701, 702, 38 Sup. Ct. Rep. 264; Farson, 239 U. S. 144, 147, 60 L. ed. 186, 187, 36 Son & Co. v. Bird, 248 U. S. 268, 271, Sup. Ct. Rep. 97.

63 L. ed. 233, 235, 39 Sup. Ct. Rep. 111 (2) California Powder Works v. Da- (and see Northern P. R. Co. v. Meese, vis, 151 U. S. 389, 393, 38 L. ed. 206, 239 U. S. 614, 619, 60 L. ed. 467, 468, 36 207, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 350; Gaar, S. & Sup. Ct. Rep. 223, 10 N. C. C. A. 939). Co. v. Shannon, 223 U. S. 468, 470, 56 (2) Equitable Life Assur. Soc. v. L. ed. 510, 512, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 236; Brown, 187 U. S. 308, 314, 47 L. ed. 190, Cuyahoga River Power Co. v. Northern 193, 23 Sup. Ct. Rep. 123; Consolidated Realty Co. 244 U. S. 300, 303, 61 L. ed. Turnp. Co. v. Norfolk & 0. V. R. Co. 1153, 1157, 37 Sup. Ct. Rep. 643; Bilby 228 U. S. 596, 600, 57 L. ed. 982, 983, 33 v. Stewart, 246 U. S. 255, 257, 62 L, ed. Sup. Ct. Rep. 605; G. & C. Merriam Co. 701, 702, 38 Sup. Ct. Rep. 264; Farson, v. Syndicate Pub. Co. 237 U. S. 618, 621, Son & Co. v. Bird, 248 U. S. 268, 271, 59 L. ed. 1148, 1149, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 63 L. ed. 233, 235, 39 Sup. Ct. Rep. 111. 708; Pennsylvania Hospital v. Philadel

phia, 245 U. S. 20, 24, 62 L. ed. 124, 128, 38 Sup. Ct. Rep. 35.

(3) New York C. R. Co. v. White, 243 BENJAMIN BOND, Plaintiff in Error, v. U. S. 188, 198, 61 L. ed. 667, 672, L.R.A. Augusta E. WALTERS.. [No. 83.]

1917D, 1, 37 Sup. Ct. Rep. 247, Ann. Error to state court-Federal question.

Cas. 1917D, 629, 13 N. C. C. A. 943; In Error to the Court of Appeals for Mountain Timber Co. v. Washington, the First Appellate District, Division 243 U. S. 219, 234, 61 L. ed. 685, 694, 37 One, State of California.

Sup. Ct. Rep. 260, Ann. Cas. 1917D, See same case below, 38 Cal. App. 245, 642, 13 N. C. C. A. 927; Middleton v. 175 Pac. 909.

Texas Power & Light Co. 249 U. S. 152, Messrs. Daniel N. Clark and Harry A. 163, 63 L. ed. 527, 534, 39 Sup. Ct. Rep. Hegarty for plaintiff in error.

227; Arizona Employers' Liability Cases Messrs. John W. Preston and John C. (Arizona Copper Co. v. Hammer) 250 Brooke for defendant in error.

U. S. 400, 63 L, ed. 1058, 6 A.L.R. 1537, November 15, 1920. Per Curiam: 39 Sup. Ct. Rep. 553. Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon (4) Palmer v. Ohio, 248 U. S. 32, 34, the authority of the Act of Congress of 63 L. ed. 108, 109, 39 Sup. Ct. Rep. 16. September 6, 1916 (39 Stat. at L. 726, chap. 448, Comp. Stat. $ 1207, Fed. Stat. Anno. Supp. 1918, p. 411).

FRANK R. LOPEZ, Appellant, v. FREDER

ICK C. Howe, as Commissioner of Im

migration at the Port of New York. [613] W. H. HUMPHREYS, as Adminis- [No. 146.)

trator, etc., Plaintiff in Error, v. Bates Appeal—from circuit court of appeals& ROGERS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. habeas corpus case. [No. 349.]

Appeal from the United States CirError to state court-Federal question. cuit Court of Appeals for the Second

In Error to the Court of Appeals of Circuit. the State of Kentucky.

See same case below, 12 A.L.R. 192, See same case below, 187 Ky. 538, 219 170 C. C. A. 377, 259 Fed. 401. S. W. 806.

[614] Mr. Charles Recht for appelMr. Allan D. Cole for plaintiff in er

lant.

Solicitor General Frierson and Mr. Messrs. E. L. Worthington, LeWright Harry S. Ridgely for appellee. Browning, and Edwin A. Swingle for November 22, 1920. Per Curiam : defendant in error.

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction, upon November 15, 20. Per Curiam : the authority of Kurtz v. Moffitt, 115 Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon U. S. 487, 498, 29 L. ed. 458, 460, 6 Sup. the authority of

Ct. Rep. 148; Lau Ow Bew v. United

lor.

States, 144 U. S. 47, 58, 36 L. ed. 340, 1557, 1561, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 892; St.
314, 12 Sup. Ct. Rep. 517; Cross v. Anthony's Church v. Pennsylvania R.
Burke, 146 U. S. 82, 38, 36 L. ed. 896, Co. 237 U. S. 575, 577, 59 L. ed. 1119,
898, 13 Sup. Ct. Rep. 22; Whitney v. 1122, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 729.
Dick, 202 U. S. 132, 135, 50 L. ed. 963,
964, 26 Sup. Ct. Rep. 584; Horn v.
Mitchell, 243 U. S. 247, 61 L. ed. 700,
37 Sup. Ct. Rep. 293. Petition for writ Ada C. MONGRAIN, Plaintiff in Error, v.
of certiorari herein denied.

W. H. Aaron et al. (No. 61.]
Error to state court-Federal question.

In Error to the Supreme Court of the

State of Oklahoma. CITY OF NEWPORT, Appellant, v. How

See same case below, Okla. 174 ARD HECKERMAN et al., etc. [No. 98.] Pac. 755. Commerce-licenses and taxes-peddlers

Mr. Preston A. Shinn for plaintiff in and drummers. Appeal from the District Court of the

Messrs. Nathan B. Williams and George United States for the Eastern District B. Denison for defendants in error. of Kentucky.

[615] December 6, 1920. Per CuriMr. Brent Spence for appellant.

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction No appearance for appellees.

upon the authority of § 237 of the JudiNovember 22, 1920. Per Curiam: cial Code, as amended by the Act of Reversed with costs, and remanded for September 6, 1916 (39 Stat. at L. 726, further proceedings upon the authority chap. 418, Comp. Stat. $ 1214, Fed. Stat. of Wagner v. Covington, 251 U. S. 95, Anno. Supp. 1918, p. 412), § 2. 64 L. ed. 157, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 93.

[ocr errors]

error.

am :

Louis WUNDER, Plaintiff in Error, v. HUGH REILLY, Plaintiff in Error, v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. [No. 197.] ROBERT SHIPMAN et al. [No. 502.]

Constitutional law-war-time prohibition. Error to circuit court of appeals-juris

In Error to the District Court of the diction below-Federal question.

United States for the District of MaryIn Error to the United States Circuit

land. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Cir

Messrs. George Lewis Eppler and Fulcuit.

ler Barnard, Jr., for plaintiff in error. See same case below, C. C. A.

Solicitor General Frierson for defend266 Fed. 852.

ant in error. Messrs. Harry L. Patton and Frank

December 6, 1920. Per Curiam: AfFaircloth for plaintiff in error.

firmed upon the authority of Hamilton Messrs. S. B. Davis, Jr., E. R. Wright,

v. Kentucky Distilleries & Warehouse Co. W. W. Spalding, and Guy Mason for de- 251 U. S. 146, 64 L. ed. 194, 40 Sup. Ct. fendants in error.

Rep. 106; Jacob Ruppert v. Caffey, 251 November 22, 1920. Per Curiam: Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon 141.

U. S. 264, 64 L. ed. 260, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. the authority of

(1) Shulthis v. McDougal, 225 U. S. 561, 568, 56 L. ed. 1205, 1210, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 704; Hull v. Burr, 234, U. S. STATE OF OKLAHOMA, Complainant, v. 712, 720, 58 L. ed. 1557, 1561, 34 Sup.

STATE OF TEXAS. [No. 23, Original.] Ct. Rep. 892; Louisville & N. R. Co. v.

December 6, 1920. Order. Western U. Teleg. Co. 237 U. S. 300,

The re302, 59 L. ed. 965, 966, 35 Sup. Ct. Repceiver is hereby authorized and directed 598; Delaware, L. & W. R. Co.

to make the following payments, and to Yurkonis, 238 Ú. S. 439, 444, 59 L. ed. charge the same as expenses of the re1397, 1400, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 902. ceivership: To Nagel & Kirby the sum

(2) Spencer v. Duplan Silk Co. 191 of $7,500, as compensation for services U. S. 526, 530, 48 L. ed. 287, 290, 24 heretofore rendered by them as counsel Sup. Ct. Rep. 174; Devine v. Los An- and attorneys for the receiver; to Mcgeles, 202 U. S. 313, 333, 50 L. ed. 1046, Kenney & Flannery the sum of $15,000, 1053, 26 Sup. Ct. Rep. 652; Shulthis v. on account of services rendered by them McDougal, 225 U. S. 561, 569, 56 L. ed. as attorneys for the receiver; and to 1205, 1210, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 704; Hull Frederic A. Delano the sum of $25,000, v. Burr, 234 U. S. 712, 720, 58 L. ed. on account of his services as receiver.

V.

ISADORE WORKIN et al., Plaintiffs in Er- See same case below, 168 C. C. A. 358,

ror, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 257 Fed. 274. [No. 115.]

Messrs. Charles C. Day and E. A. WatError to circuit court of appeals--crimi- son for appellant. nal case.

Messrs. William W. Ray, George FranIn Error to the United States Circuit cis Williams, A. C. Ellis, Jr., and L. F. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Adamson for appellees.

See same case below, 171 C. C. A. 173, December 13, 1920. Per Curiam: Dis260 Fed. 137.

missed for want of jurisdiction upon the Messrs. Lawrence B. Cohen and I. authority of Maurice Wormser for plaintiffs in error. (1) Shulthis v. McDougal, 225 U. S. 561,

Solicitor General Frierson for defend- 568, 56 L. ed. 1205, 1210, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. ants in error.

704; Hull v. Burr, 234 U. S. 712, 720, December 13, 1920. Per Curiam: Dis- 58 L. ed. 1557, 1561, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 892; missed for want of jurisdiction, upon the Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Western U. authority of Macfadden v. United States, Teleg. Co. 237 U. S. 300, 302, 59 L. ed. 213 U. S. 288, 53 L. ed. 801, 29 Sup. Ct. 965, 966, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 598; Delaware, Rep. 490. And see Boise Artesian Hot & L. & W. R. Co. v. Yurkonis, 238 U. S. Cold Water Co. v. Boise City, 230 U. S. 439, 444, 59 L. ed. 1397, 1400, 35 Sup. 98, 100, 57 L. ed. 1409, 1410, 33 Sup. Ct. Ct. Rep. 902. Rep. 1003; United States ex rel. Chott v. (2) Spencer v. Duplan Silk Co. 191 Ewing, 237 U. S. 197, 59 L. ed. 913, 35 U. S. 526, 530, 48 L. ed. 287, 290, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 571; Alaska Pacific Fish- Sup. Ct. Rep. 174; Devine v. Los Angeles, eries v. Alaska, 249 U. S. 53, 60, 61, 63 202 U. S. 313, 333, 50 L. ed. 1046, 1053, L. ed. 474, 477, 478, 39 Sup. Ct. Rep. 26 Sup. Ct. Rep. 652; St. Anthony's 208.

Church v. Pennsylvania R. Co. 237 U. S. 575, 577, 578, 59 L. ed. 1119, 1122, 1123, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 729; Norton v. White

side, 239 U. S. 144, 147, 60 L. ed. 186, [616] DAVID LAMAR et al., Plaintiffs in 187, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 97.

Error, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

[No. 140.] Error to circuit court of appeals-crimi- BENJAMIN Horowitz et al., Plaintiffs in nal case.

Error, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. In Error to the United States Circuit

[No. 232.] Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Error to circuit court of appeals---crimi

See same case below, 260 Fed. 561.
Mr. Elijah N. Zoline for plaintiffs in

In Error to the United States Circuit

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Solicitor General Frierson and Mr.

See same case below,

C. C. A. —, Henry S. Mitchell for defendant in error. 262 Fed. 48. December 13, 1920. Per Curiam: Dis

Messrs. John J. Fitzgerald and Elijab missed for want of jurisdiction upon the n. Zoline for plaintiffs in error. authority of Macfadden v. United States,

Solicitor General Frierson for defend213 U. S. 288, 53 L. ed. 801, 29 Sup. Ct.

ant in error. Rep. 490. And see Boise Artesian Hot & Cold Water Co. v. Boise City, 230 U. S. missed for want of jurisdiction upon the

December 13, 1920. Per Curiam: Dis98, 100, 57 L. ed. 1409, 1410, 33 Sup. Ct. authority of Macfadden v. [617] United Rep. 1003; United States ex rel. Chott States, 213 U. S. 288, 53 l. ed. 801, 29 v. Ewing, 237 U. S. 197, 59 L. ed. 913, Sup. Ct. Rep. 490. And see Boise Arte35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 571; Alaska Pacific sian Hot or Cold Water Co. v. Boise City, Fisheries v. Alaska, 249 U. S. 53, 60, 230 U. S. 98, 100, 57 L. ed. 1409, 1410, 61, 63 L. ed. 474, 477, 478, 39 Sup. Ct. 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1003; United States ex Rep. 208.

rel. Chott v. Ewing, 237 U. S. 197, 59 L. ed. 913, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 571; Alaska

Pacific Fisheries v. Alaska, 219 U. S. 53, TRUMAN A. KETCHUM, Appellant, v. 60, 61, 63 L. ed. 474, 477, 478, 39 Sup PLEASANT VALLEY COAL COMPANY et al. Ct. Rep. 208.

[No. 164.] Appeal—from circuit court of appeals— jurisdiction below-Federal question. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellant,

Appeal from the United States Circuit v. LEHIGH VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. et al. [No. 1.]

nal case.

error.

[ocr errors]

Motion to modify the decree of this Error-to District of Columbia court of court.

appeals-Federal authority. Solicitor General Frierson for appel- In Error to the Court of Appeals of lant.

the District of Columbia. Mr. Edgar H. Boles for appellees. See same case below, 49 App. D. C. 48, December 20, 1920. Denied.

258 Fed. 520.

Messrs. Francis W. Clements, H. A. Ledbetter, and Alexander Britton for

plaintiff in error. NEW ORLEANS Dry Dock & SHIPBUILD

Solicitor General Frierson, Assistant ING COMPANY, Plaintiff in Error, v. Attorneys General Nebeker and Garnett,

JOHN A. S. GRAY. [No. 301.] and Mr. H. L. Underwood for defendant Error to state court-Federal question.

in error. In Error to the Supreme Court of the January 17, 1921. Per Curiam: DisState of Louisiana.

missed for want of jurisdiction upon auSee same case below, 146 La. 826, 84 thority of subdivision 5 of § 250 of the So. 109.

Judicial Code; United States ex rel. Messrs. Frederic D. McKenney and Champion Lumber Co. v. Fisher, 227 U. John Spalding Flannery for plaintiff in S. 445, 57 L. ed. 591, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. error.

329. Mr. Percy S. Benedict for defendant in error.

January 3, 1921. Per Curiam: Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the FITCH, CORNELL, & COMPANY, Plaintiff authority of § 237 of the Judicial Code, in Error, V. ATCHISON, TOPEKA, & as amended by the Act of September 6, SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY. (No. 1916 (39 Stat. at L. 726, chap. 448,

137.] Comp. Stat. § 1214, Fed. Stat. Anno. Error to state court--Federal question. Supp. 1918, p. 411), § 2.

In Error to the Supreme Court of the State of New York.

See same case below, in supreme court,

170 App. Div. 222, 155 N. Y. Supp. 1079; HENRY RALPH and Mary Thoms, Plain- in court of appeals, 226 N. Y. 597, 123

tiffs in Error, v. Harry W. HOWARTII, N. E. 864. Administrator, etc. [No. 132.]

Messrs. Harold G. Aron and Henry Error to state court-Federal question. M. Wise for plaintiff in error.

In Error to the Supreme Court of the Messrs. Gardiner Lathrop, S. T. BledState of Nebraska.

soe, and A. S. H. Bristow for defendant Mr. Byron G. Burbank for plaintiffs in error. in error.

January 17, 1921. Per Curiam: DisMr. Otto H. Zacek for defendant in er- missed for want of jurisdiction upon the

authority of § 237 of the Judicial Code, January 17, 1921. Per Curiam: Dis- as amended by the Act of September 6. missed for want of jurisdiction upon the 1916 (39 Stat. at L._726, chap. 448, authority of g 237 of the Judicial Code, Comp. Stat. § 1214, Fed. Stat. Anno. as amended by the Act of September 6, Supp. 1918, p. 411), § 2; Jett Bros. Dis1916 (39 Stat. at L._726, chap. 448, tilling Co. v. Carrollton, 252 U. S. 1, 64 Comp. Stat. § 1214, Fed. Stat. Anno. L. ed. 421, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 255. Supp. 1918, p. 411), § 2; [618] Jett Bros. Distilling Co. v. Carrollton, 252 U. S. 1, 64 L. ed. 421, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 255.

Louis H. DENEE, Plaintiff in Error, v.

PETER MORRISON. (No. 168.]

Error to state court-Federal question. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EX REL. C. In Error to the Supreme Court of the

E. SYKES, Plaintiff in Error, v. John State of Washington. BARTON Payne, Secretary of the In- See same case below, 95 Wash. 76, 163 terior. [No. 135.)

Pac. 382.

Mr. Fred B. Morrill for plaintiff in 1 Leave granted May 17, 1920, to substitute as defendant in error John Barton Payne, present Secretary of the Interior,

Messrs. Reese H. Voorhees and F. T. in the place of Franklin K. Lane, former Post for defendant in error. Secretary thereof, on motion of counsel for January 17, 1921. Per Curiam: Dis. the defendant in error.

missed for want of jurisdiction upon the

ror.

error.

« PředchozíPokračovat »