RUDNICKI v. COX, 372 U.S. 226 (1963)
U.S. Supreme Court
RUDNICKI v. COX, 372 U.S. 226 (1963) 372 U.S. 226RUDNICKI v. COX ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT
OF
MASSACHUSETTS. No. 706.
Decided February 18, 1963.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed.
372 U.S. 226 (1963) 372 U.S. 226 (1963) ">
U.S. Supreme Court
BOARD CTY. COMM'RS, JEFFERSON v. CITY & CTY., DENVER, 372 U.S. 226 (1963) 372 U.S. 226BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO, ET
AL. v.
CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLORADO, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO. No. 635.
Decided February 18, 1963.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 150 Colo. 198, 372 P.2d 152.
Charles Ginsberg for appellants.
Robert S. Wham, Richard P. Matsch, Charles S. Rhyne, Brice W. Rhyne and Alfred J. Tighe, Jr. for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
MR. JUSTICE WHITE took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
U.S. Supreme Court
RUDNICKI v. COX, 372 U.S. 226 (1963) 372 U.S. 226 RUDNICKI v. COX ET AL.APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF
MASSACHUSETTS. No. 706.
Decided February 18, 1963.
PER CURIAM. The appeal is dismissed. Page 372 U.S. 226, 227
372 U.S. 226 (1963) 372 U.S. 226 (1963) ">
U.S. Supreme Court
BOARD CTY. COMM'RS, JEFFERSON v. CITY & CTY., DENVER, 372 U.S. 226 (1963) 372 U.S. 226 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO, ET AL. v.CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLORADO, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO. No. 635.
Decided February 18, 1963.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Reported below: 150 Colo. 198, 372 P.2d 152. Charles Ginsberg for appellants. Robert S. Wham, Richard P. Matsch, Charles S. Rhyne, Brice W. Rhyne and Alfred J. Tighe, Jr. for appellees. PER CURIAM. The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. MR. JUSTICE WHITE took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
