PERK v. OHIO
396 U.S. 113 (1969)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

PERK v. OHIO, 396 U.S. 113 (1969)

396 U.S. 113

PERK, AUDITOR OF CUYAHOGA COUNTY v. OHIO EX REL. CORRIGAN, PROSECUTING
ATTORNEY OF CUYAHOGA COUNTY
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO No. 590.
Decided December 8, 1969

19 Ohio St. 2d 1, 249 N. E. 2d 525, appeal dismissed.

Gerald A. Donahue and Donald M. Robiner for appellant.

John T. Corrigan, pro se, and John L. Dowling for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

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

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.


MISSISSIPPI POWER & LIGHT v. CAPITAL ELEC. POW. ASSN., <a href="/cases/federal/us/396/113/case.html">396 U.S. 113</a> (1969) 396 U.S. 113 (1969) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

MISSISSIPPI POWER & LIGHT v. CAPITAL ELEC. POW. ASSN., 396 U.S. 113 (1969)

396 U.S. 113

MISSISSIPPI POWER & LIGHT CO. v. CAPITAL ELECTRIC POWER ASSN.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI
No. 611.
Decided December 8, 1969

222 So.2d 399, appeal dismissed.

Bernard G. Segal, Samuel D. Slade, Sherwood W. Wise, Garner W. Green, and Joshua Green for appellant.

T. Harvey Hedgepeth for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 396 U.S. 113, 114




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.