CAPELOUTO v. ORKIN EXTERMINATING CO.
385 U.S. 11 (1966)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

CAPELOUTO v. ORKIN EXTERMINATING CO., 385 U.S. 11 (1966)

385 U.S. 11

CAPELOUTO v. ORKIN EXTERMINATING CO. OF FLORIDA, INC.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA.
No. 316.
Decided October 10, 1966.

183 So.2d 532, appeal dismissed.

Wilfred C. Varn for appellant.

J. Lewis Hall for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

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


MASLOWSKY v. CASSIDY, <a href="/cases/federal/us/385/11/case.html">385 U.S. 11</a> (1966) 385 U.S. 11 (1966) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

MASLOWSKY v. CASSIDY, 385 U.S. 11 (1966)

385 U.S. 11

MASLOWSKY ET AL. v. CASSIDY, CHAIRMAN, ILLINOIS HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES COMMISSION, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS. No. 574.
Decided October 10, 1966.

34 Ill. 2d 456, 216 N. E. 2d 669, appeal dismissed.

Albert E. Jenner, Jr., and Thomas P. Sullivan for appellants.

Owen Rall for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.

Page 385 U.S. 11, 12




Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law 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.