STANDARD PIPE LINE CO. v. COMMISSIONERS OF INDEX SULPHUR DRAINAGE, 278 U.S. 558 (1928)

U.S. Supreme Court

STANDARD PIPE LINE CO. v. COMMISSIONERS OF INDEX SULPHUR DRAINAGE, 278 U.S. 558 (1928)

278 U.S. 558
No. 11.

STANDARD PIPE LINE COMPANY, Inc., et al., petitioners,
v.
COMMISSIONERS OF INDEX SULPHUR DRAINAGE DISTRICT.

Supreme Court of the United States

October 15, 1928

Messrs. T. M. Milling, of Shreveport, La., and William H. Arnold, William H. Arnold, Jr., and David C. Arnold, all of Texarkana, Ark., for petitioner.

Mr. Henry Moore, Jr., of Texarkana, Ark., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The writ of certiorari (48 S. Ct. 420) is dismissed for the reason that the decree of the state court sought here to be reviewed was based on a non-Federal ground adequate to support it. Bilby v. Stewart, 246 U.S. 255, 257, 38 S. Ct. 264; Farson, Son & Co. v. Bird, 248 U.S. 268, 271, 39 S. Ct. 111.[ Standard Pipe Line Co v. Comm. of Index Sulphur Drainage Dist. 278 U.S. 558 (1928) ]


U.S. Supreme Court

STANDARD PIPE LINE CO. v. COMMISSIONERS OF INDEX SULPHUR DRAINAGE, 278 U.S. 558 (1928)

 278 U.S. 558 
No. 11.

STANDARD PIPE LINE COMPANY, Inc., et al., petitioners,
v.
COMMISSIONERS OF INDEX SULPHUR DRAINAGE DISTRICT.

Supreme Court of the United States

October 15, 1928

Messrs. T. M. Milling, of Shreveport, La., and William H. Arnold, William H. Arnold, Jr., and David C. Arnold, all of Texarkana, Ark., for petitioner.

Mr. Henry Moore, Jr., of Texarkana, Ark., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The writ of certiorari (48 S. Ct. 420) is dismissed for the reason that the decree of the state court sought here to be reviewed was based on a non-Federal ground adequate to support it. Bilby v. Stewart, 246 U.S. 255, 257, 38 S. Ct. 264; Farson, Son & Co. v. Bird, 248 U.S. 268, 271, 39 S. Ct. 111.[ Standard Pipe Line Co v. Comm. of Index Sulphur Drainage Dist. 278 U.S. 558 (1928) ]

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.

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.