HILLIARD v. CITY OF GAINESVILLE, 393 U.S. 321 (1969)
Subscribe to Cases that cite 393 U.S. 321
Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/393/321/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/393/321/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
HILLIARD v. CITY OF GAINESVILLE, 393 U.S. 321 (1969)
393 U.S. 321 HILLIARD v. CITY OF GAINESVILLE.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA.
No. 745.
Decided January 13, 1969.
213 So.2d 689, appeal dismissed.
Richard W. Wilson for appellant.
Osee R. Fagan 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.
U.S. Supreme Court
MID-VALLEY PIPELINE CO. v. KING, 393 U.S. 321 (1969)
393 U.S. 321 MID-VALLEY PIPELINE CO. v. KING, COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE.
No. 756.
Decided January 13, 1969.
221 Tenn. 724, 431 S. W. 2d 277, appeal dismissed.
H. Vincent E. Mitchell and J. Martin Regan for appellant.
George F. McCanless, Attorney General of Tennessee, and Milton P. Rice, Deputy Attorney General, for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
MR. JUSTICE STEWART and MR. JUSTICE WHITE are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.