KING v. KING
375 U.S. 17 (1963)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

KING v. KING, 375 U.S. 17 (1963)

375 U.S. 17

KING ET AL. v. KING ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA.
No. 153, Misc.
Decided October 14, 1963.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Reported below: 218 Ga. 534, 129 S. E. 2d 147.

Appellants pro se.

William K. Meadow and Robert B. Troutman for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.


RYAN v. TINSLEY, <a href="/cases/federal/us/375/17/case.html">375 U.S. 17</a> (1963) 375 U.S. 17 (1963) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

RYAN v. TINSLEY, 375 U.S. 17 (1963)

375 U.S. 17

RYAN v. TINSLEY, WARDEN.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT.
No. 403, Misc.
Decided October 14, 1963.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Reported below: 316 F.2d 430.

Appellant pro se.

Duke W. Dunbar, Attorney General of Colorado, Frank E. Hickey, Deputy Attorney General, and John E. Bush, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.

Page 375 U.S. 17, 18




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.