KITTY HAWK DEVELOPMENT CO. v. CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS
379 U.S. 647 (1965)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

KITTY HAWK DEVELOPMENT CO. v. CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS, 379 U.S. 647 (1965)

379 U.S. 647

KITTY HAWK DEVELOPMENT CO. v. CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO.
No. 565.
Decided January 18, 1965.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Reported below: 154 Colo. 535, 392 P.2d 467.

E. Barrett Prettyman, Jr., for appellant.

Louis Johnson, Charles S. Rhyne, Brice W. Rhyne and Alfred J. Tighe, Jr., for appellee.

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.


SHERIDAN v. GARDNER, <a href="/cases/federal/us/379/647/case.html">379 U.S. 647</a> (1965) 379 U.S. 647 (1965) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

SHERIDAN v. GARDNER, 379 U.S. 647 (1965)

379 U.S. 647

SHERIDAN v. GARDNER ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, SUFFOLK COUNTY.
No. 612.
Decided January 18, 1965.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Morris M. Goldings, Francis X. McLaughlin and Thomas J. O'Toole for appellant.

Edward W. Brooke, Attorney General of Massachusetts, and Warren K. Kaplan, Special Assistant Attorney General, for Brooke, and Marshall Simonds for Gardner et al., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 379 U.S. 647, 648




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.