INTERNATIONAL TEXT-BOOK CO. v. PETERSON, 218 U.S. 664 (1910)
U.S. Supreme Court
INTERNATIONAL TEXT-BOOK CO. v. PETERSON, 218 U.S. 664 (1910)218 U.S. 664
INTERNATIONAL TEXT-BOOK COMPANY,
Plaintiff in Error,
v.
CARL PETERSON.
No. 3.
INTERNATIONAL TEXT-BOOK COMPANY,
Plaintiff in Error,
v.
CONNELL R. LYNCH.
No. 27.
Supreme Court of the United States
November 7, 1910
Mr. David C. Harrington for plaintiff in error.
No briefs filed for defendants in error.
Per Curiam: Substantially the same question of Federal law
involved in these two cases arose under a Kansas statute in
International Text-Book Co. v. Pigg, 217 U.S. 91, 54 L. Ed.
678, 27 L.R.A.(N.S.) 493, 30 Sup. Ct. Rep. 481; and the Federal
right asserted in that case was sustained. There is no difference
in principle between the two cases last named and the Pigg Case,
although the Federal question involved in them arises under the
statutes, respectively, of other states,-Wisconsin and Vermont. In
view of the pleadings and the conceded facts in these cases, the
judgment in each of them must be reversed on the authority of the
Pigg Case, and the cases are severally remanded for such further
proceedings as is required by, and is not inconsistent with, this
opinion. It is so ordered.[ International Text-Book Co v. Peterson
218 U.S. 664
(1910) ]
U.S. Supreme Court
INTERNATIONAL TEXT-BOOK CO. v. PETERSON, 218 U.S. 664 (1910) 218 U.S. 664 INTERNATIONAL TEXT-BOOK COMPANY, Plaintiff in Error,v.
CARL PETERSON. No. 3. INTERNATIONAL TEXT-BOOK COMPANY, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
CONNELL R. LYNCH.
No. 27.
Supreme Court of the United States November 7, 1910 Mr. David C. Harrington for plaintiff in error. No briefs filed for defendants in error. Per Curiam: Substantially the same question of Federal law involved in these two cases arose under a Kansas statute in International Text-Book Co. v. Pigg, 217 U.S. 91, 54 L. Ed. 678, 27 L.R.A.(N.S.) 493, 30 Sup. Ct. Rep. 481; and the Federal right asserted in that case was sustained. There is no difference in principle between the two cases last named and the Pigg Case, although the Federal question involved in them arises under the statutes, respectively, of other states,-Wisconsin and Vermont. In view of the pleadings and the conceded facts in these cases, the judgment in each of them must be reversed on the authority of the Pigg Case, and the cases are severally remanded for such further proceedings as is required by, and is not inconsistent with, this opinion. It is so ordered.[ International Text-Book Co v. Peterson 218 U.S. 664 (1910) ]
