MALONEY v. HOLDEN
379 U.S. 6 (1964)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

MALONEY v. HOLDEN, 379 U.S. 6 (1964)

379 U.S. 6

MALONEY v. HOLDEN, JUDGE.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO.
No. 225, Misc.
Decided October 12, 1964.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Page 379 U.S. 6, 7


COOPER-JARRETT, v. UNITED STATES, <a href="/cases/federal/us/379/6/case.html">379 U.S. 6</a> (1964) 379 U.S. 6 (1964) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

COOPER-JARRETT, v. UNITED STATES, 379 U.S. 6 (1964)

379 U.S. 6

COOPER-JARRETT, INC., ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF
MISSOURI. No. 159.
Decided October 12, 1964.

226 F. Supp. 318, affirmed.

Kenneth E. Midgley, Thomas J. Hogan, Bryce Rea, Jr., Roland Rice, Homer S. Carpenter and John S. Fessenden for appellants.

Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Orrick, Robert B. Hummel and Robert W. Ginnane for the United States et al.; and Carl E. Enggas, D. Robert Thomas, John F. Donelan, Nuel D. Belnap, Harvey Huston, John A. Daily, Paul R. Duke and John M. Cleary for Eastern Railroads et al., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.

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.