HANOVER INSURANCE CO. v. VICTOR
393 U.S. 7 (1968)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

HANOVER INSURANCE CO. v. VICTOR, 393 U.S. 7 (1968)

393 U.S. 7

HANOVER INSURANCE CO. OF NEW YORK v. VICTOR.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
No. 50.
Decided October 14, 1968.

Appeal dismissed.

Florindo M. DeRosa, Duncan C. Lee, Frank A. Celentano, and Peter J. Malloy, Jr., for appellant.

Harriet E. Gair for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

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


COHON v. KIRBY, <a href="/cases/federal/us/393/7/case.html">393 U.S. 7</a> (1968) 393 U.S. 7 (1968) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

COHON v. KIRBY, 393 U.S. 7 (1968)

393 U.S. 7

COHON ET AL. v.
KIRBY, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL OF CALIFORNIA.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT. No. 57.
Decided October 14, 1968.

256 Cal. App. 2d 158, 64 Cal. Rptr. 26, appeal dismissed.

Herbert A. Leland, March E. Leland, J. Bruce Fratis, Joseph L. Alioto, and Richard Saveri for appellants.

Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, and Elizabeth Palmer and L. Stephen Porter, Deputy Attorneys General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 393 U.S. 7, 8




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.