HAYES v. HOCKING VALLEY R. CO., 249 U.S. 591 (1919)

Syllabus

U.S. Supreme Court

HAYES v. HOCKING VALLEY R. CO. , 249 U.S. 591 (1919)

249 U.S. 591

Webb C. HAYES, plintiff in error,
v.
The HOCKING VALLEY RAILWAY COMPANY.
No. 388.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 28, 1919

Page 249 U.S. 591, 592

Mr. Chas. A. Seiders, of Toledo, Ohio, for plaintiff in error.


Opinions

U.S. Supreme Court

HAYES v. HOCKING VALLEY R. CO. , 249 U.S. 591 (1919)  249 U.S. 591

Webb C. HAYES, plintiff in error,
v.
The HOCKING VALLEY RAILWAY COMPANY.
No. 388.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 28, 1919

Page 249 U.S. 591, 592

Mr. Chas. A. Seiders, of Toledo, Ohio, for plaintiff in error.

Messrs. John F. Wilson, of Columbus, Ohio, and Lloyd T. Williams, of Toledo, Ohio (Messrs. Wilson & Rector, of Columbus, Ohio, and Brown, Geddes, Schmettau & Williams, of Toledo, Ohio, of counsel), for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM.

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of 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, 218, 35 S. Sup. Ct. 285.