PURCELL v. QUAKER REALTY CO., 239 U.S. 635 (1916)
70 S. Ct. 283 239 U.S. 635 60 L. Ed. 479 ROBERT M. PURCELL et al., Plaintiffs in Error, Supreme Court of the United States January 10, 1916U.S. Supreme Court
PURCELL v. QUAKER REALTY CO., 239 U.S. 635 (1916)
v.
QUAKER REALTY COMPANY, LIMITED.
No. 152.
Mr. E. Howard McCaleb for plaintiffs in error.
Mr. William Winans Wall for defendants in error.
Per Curiam:
Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of (1) Castillo v. McConnico, 168 U.S. 674, 42 L. Ed. 622, 18 Sup. Ct. Rep. 229; De Bearn v. Safe Deposit & T. Co. 233 U.S. 24, 34, 58 S. L. ed. 833, 837, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 584; McDonald v. Oregon R. & Nav. Co. 233 U.S. 665, 669, 670 S., 58 L. Ed. 1145, 1148, 1149, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 772; (2) Ross v. Oregon, 227 U.S. 150, 161, 57 S. L. ed. 458, 463, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 220, Ann. Cas. 1914C, 224; Moore-Mansfield Constr. Co. v. Electrical Installation Co. 234 U.S. 619, 624, 58 S. L. ed. 1503, 1505, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 941; Willoughby v. Chicago, cago, 235 U.S. 45, 59 L. Ed. 123, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 23; Cleveland & P. R. Co. v. Cleveland, 235 U.S. 50, 59 L. Ed. 127, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 21.[ Purcell v. Quaker Realty Co. 239 U.S. 635 (1916) ]
U.S. Supreme Court
PURCELL v. QUAKER REALTY CO., 239 U.S. 635 (1916)
70 S. Ct. 283 239 U.S. 635 60 L. Ed. 479
ROBERT M. PURCELL et al., Plaintiffs in Error,
v.
QUAKER REALTY COMPANY, LIMITED.
No. 152.
Supreme Court of the United States
January 10, 1916
Mr. E. Howard McCaleb for plaintiffs in error.
Mr. William Winans Wall for defendants in error.
Per Curiam:
Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of (1) Castillo v. McConnico, 168 U.S. 674, 42 L. Ed. 622, 18 Sup. Ct. Rep. 229; De Bearn v. Safe Deposit & T. Co. 233 U.S. 24, 34, 58 S. L. ed. 833, 837, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 584; McDonald v. Oregon R. & Nav. Co. 233 U.S. 665, 669, 670 S., 58 L. Ed. 1145, 1148, 1149, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 772; (2) Ross v. Oregon, 227 U.S. 150, 161, 57 S. L. ed. 458, 463, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 220, Ann. Cas. 1914C, 224; Moore-Mansfield Constr. Co. v. Electrical Installation Co. 234 U.S. 619, 624, 58 S. L. ed. 1503, 1505, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 941; Willoughby v. Chicago, cago, 235 U.S. 45, 59 L. Ed. 123, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 23; Cleveland & P. R. Co. v. Cleveland, 235 U.S. 50, 59 L. Ed. 127, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 21.[ Purcell v. Quaker Realty Co. 239 U.S. 635 (1916) ]
