FELLOM v. REDEVELOPMENT AGY., CITY & CTY., SAN FRANCISCO, 358 U.S. 56 (1958)
Syllabus
Decided October 27, 1958.
U.S. Supreme Court
FELLOM v. REDEVELOPMENT AGY., CITY & CTY., SAN FRANCISCO, 358 U.S. 56 (1958) 358 U.S. 56FELLOM ET AL. v. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF
SAN FRANCISCO ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST
APPELLATE
Decided October 27, 1958.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 157 Cal. App. 2d 243, 320 P.2d 884.
Appellants pro se.
Dion R. Holm and George E. Baglin for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Opinions
SAN FRANCISCO ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT. No. 323.
Decided October 27, 1958.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Reported below: 157 Cal. App. 2d 243, 320 P.2d 884. Appellants pro se. Dion R. Holm and George E. Baglin for appellees. PER CURIAM. The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Page 358 U.S. 56, 57
U.S. Supreme Court
FELLOM v. REDEVELOPMENT AGY., CITY & CTY., SAN FRANCISCO, 358 U.S. 56 (1958) 358 U.S. 56 FELLOM ET AL. v. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OFSAN FRANCISCO ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT. No. 323.
Decided October 27, 1958.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Reported below: 157 Cal. App. 2d 243, 320 P.2d 884. Appellants pro se. Dion R. Holm and George E. Baglin for appellees. PER CURIAM. The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Page 358 U.S. 56, 57
Search This Case
