VALDES v. MUNICH, 212 U.S. 568 (1909)
U.S. Supreme Court
VALDES v. MUNICH, 212 U.S. 568 (1909)212 U.S. 568
RAMON VALDES, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
VENTURA MUNICH
No. 457.
RAMON VALDES, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
O. M. WOOD
No. 473.
RAMON VALDES, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
MARIA VENEGA PERIANES
No. 474.
Supreme Court of the United States
February 1, 1909
Messrs. F. Kingsbury Curtis, John G. Carlisle, and Henry A. Stickney for plaintiff in error.
Mr. Willis Sweet for defendants in error.
Per Curiam: Writs of Error dismissed for want of
jurisdictional amounts. Act of April 12, 1900, chap. 191, 31 Stat.
at L. 77, 34, 35; act of March 2, 1901, chap. 812, 31 Stat. at L.
953, 3; Royal Ins. Co. v. Martin, 192 U.S.
149, 159, 48 S. L. ed. 385, 388, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 247; Ortega
v. Lara, 202 U.S.
339, 50 L. Ed. 1055, 26 Sup. Ct. Rep. 707; Perez v. Fernandez,
202 U.S. 80, 50 L.
Ed. 942, 26 Sup. Ct. Rep. 561; Garrozi v. Dastas, 204 U.S.
64, 73, 51 S. L. ed. 369, 376, 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 224.
U.S. Supreme Court
VALDES v. MUNICH, 212 U.S. 568 (1909) 212 U.S. 568 RAMON VALDES, Plaintiff in Error,v.
VENTURA MUNICH
No. 457.
RAMON VALDES, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
O. M. WOOD No. 473. RAMON VALDES, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
MARIA VENEGA PERIANES No. 474. Supreme Court of the United States February 1, 1909 Page 212 U.S. 568, 569 Messrs. F. Kingsbury Curtis, John G. Carlisle, and Henry A. Stickney for plaintiff in error. Mr. Willis Sweet for defendants in error. Per Curiam: Writs of Error dismissed for want of jurisdictional amounts. Act of April 12, 1900, chap. 191, 31 Stat. at L. 77, 34, 35; act of March 2, 1901, chap. 812, 31 Stat. at L. 953, 3; Royal Ins. Co. v. Martin, 192 U.S. 149, 159, 48 S. L. ed. 385, 388, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 247; Ortega v. Lara, 202 U.S. 339, 50 L. Ed. 1055, 26 Sup. Ct. Rep. 707; Perez v. Fernandez, 202 U.S. 80, 50 L. Ed. 942, 26 Sup. Ct. Rep. 561; Garrozi v. Dastas, 204 U.S. 64, 73, 51 S. L. ed. 369, 376, 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 224.
