CERMINARO v. URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AUTH. OF PITTSBURGH
362 U.S. 457 (1960)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

CERMINARO v. URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AUTH. OF PITTSBURGH, 362 U.S. 457 (1960)

362 U.S. 457

CERMINARO v. URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF PITTSBURGH ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF
PENNSYLVANIA. No. 654, Misc.
Decided April 25, 1960.

Appeal dismissed.

Reported below: ___ F. Supp. ___.

Louis C. Glasso for appellant.

Theodore L. Hazlett, Jr. and David Stahl for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed.


CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO. v. CITY OF EUCLID, <a href="/cases/federal/us/362/457/case.html">362 U.S. 457</a> (1960) 362 U.S. 457 (1960) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO. v. CITY OF EUCLID, 362 U.S. 457 (1960)

362 U.S. 457

CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO. v. CITY OF EUCLID, OHIO, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO.
No. 740.
Decided April 25, 1960.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 170 Ohio St. 45, 162 N. E. 2d 125.

John Lansdale for appellant.

Paul H. Torbet and John F. Ray, Jr. for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Page 362 U.S. 457, 458




Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.