SEARS v. INHABITANTS OF TOWN OF NAHANT, 248 U.S. 543 (1918)
U.S. Supreme Court
SEARS v. INHABITANTS OF TOWN OF NAHANT , 248 U.S. 543 (1918)
248 U.S. 543
Frederick R. SEARS et al., plaintiffs in error,
v.
INHABITANTS OF THE TOWN OF NAHANT, etc.
No. 61.
Supreme Court of the United States
December 23, 1918
Mr. Burton E. Eames, of Boston, Mass., for plaintiffs in error.
Messrs. Robert G. Dodge and Arthur D. Hill, both of Boston, Mass., for defendants in error.
PER CURIAM.
Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of (1) McCain v. Des Moines, 174 U.S. 168, 181, 19 S. Sup. Ct. 644; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Ann Arbor R. R. Co., 178 U.S. 239, 243, 20 S. Sup. Ct. 867; Hull v. Burr, 234 U.S. 712, 720, 34 S. Sup. Ct. 892; Norton v. Whiteside, 239 U.S. 144, 147, 36 S. Sup. Ct. 97; (2) Farrell v. O'Brien, 199 U.S. 89, 100, 25 S. Sup. Ct. 727; Empire State-Idaho Mining Co. v. Hanley, 205 U.S. 225, 232, 27 S. Sup. Ct. 476; Goodrich v. Ferris, 214 U.S. 71, 79, 29 S. Sup. Ct. 580; Brolan v. United States, 236 U.S. 216, 35 Sup. Ct. 285; (3) Consolidated Turnpike Co. v. Norfolk, etc., R. Co., 228 U.S. 596, 599, 33 S. Sup. Ct. 605; Cuyahoga River Power Co. v. Northern Realty Co., 244 U.S. 300, 304, 37 S. Sup. Ct. 643; Bilby et al. v. Stewart, 246 U.S. 255, 257, 38 S. Sup. Ct. 264.
U.S. Supreme Court
SEARS v. INHABITANTS OF TOWN OF NAHANT , 248 U.S. 543 (1918)
Frederick R. SEARS et al., plaintiffs in error,
v.
INHABITANTS OF THE TOWN OF NAHANT, etc.
No. 61.
Supreme Court of the United States
December 23, 1918
Mr. Burton E. Eames, of Boston, Mass., for plaintiffs in error.
Messrs. Robert G. Dodge and Arthur D. Hill, both of Boston, Mass., for defendants in error.
PER CURIAM.
Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of (1) McCain v. Des Moines, 174 U.S. 168, 181, 19 S. Sup. Ct. 644; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Ann Arbor R. R. Co., 178 U.S. 239, 243, 20 S. Sup. Ct. 867; Hull v. Burr, 234 U.S. 712, 720, 34 S. Sup. Ct. 892; Norton v. Whiteside, 239 U.S. 144, 147, 36 S. Sup. Ct. 97; (2) Farrell v. O'Brien, 199 U.S. 89, 100, 25 S. Sup. Ct. 727; Empire State-Idaho Mining Co. v. Hanley, 205 U.S. 225, 232, 27 S. Sup. Ct. 476; Goodrich v. Ferris, 214 U.S. 71, 79, 29 S. Sup. Ct. 580; Brolan v. United States, 236 U.S. 216, 35 Sup. Ct. 285; (3) Consolidated Turnpike Co. v. Norfolk, etc., R. Co., 228 U.S. 596, 599, 33 S. Sup. Ct. 605; Cuyahoga River Power Co. v. Northern Realty Co., 244 U.S. 300, 304, 37 S. Sup. Ct. 643; Bilby et al. v. Stewart, 246 U.S. 255, 257, 38 S. Sup. Ct. 264.
Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.