NELSON v. TENNESSEE, 355 U.S. 271 (1957)
U.S. Supreme Court
NELSON v. TENNESSEE, 355 U.S. 271 (1957)
355 U.S. 271 NELSON ET AL. v. TENNESSEE.
CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE, EASTERN DISTRICT.
No. 56.
Argued December 12, 1957.
Decided December 16, 1957.
Certiorari dismissed for want of properly presented federal question.
Reported below: 200 Tenn. 462, 292 S. W. 2d 727.
Hobart F. Atkins argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioners.
James M. Glasgow, Assistant Attorney General of Tennessee, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was George F. McCanless, Attorney General.
PER CURIAM.
The writ of certiorari is dismissed for want of a properly presented federal question.
U.S. Supreme Court
MACDONALD v. LA SALLE NATIONAL BANK, CONSERVATOR, 355 U.S. 271 (1957)
355 U.S. 271 MACDONALD v. LA SALLE NATIONAL BANK, CONSERVATOR.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS.
No. 504.
Decided December 16, 1957.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 11 Ill. 2d 122, 142 N. E. 2d 58.
Appellant pro se.
John R. Nicholson and Charles M. Nisen for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
U.S. Supreme Court
NELSON v. TENNESSEE, 355 U.S. 271 (1957)
355 U.S. 271 NELSON ET AL. v. TENNESSEE.
CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE, EASTERN DISTRICT.
No. 56.
Argued December 12, 1957.
Decided December 16, 1957.
Certiorari dismissed for want of properly presented federal question.
Reported below: 200 Tenn. 462, 292 S. W. 2d 727.
Hobart F. Atkins argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioners.
James M. Glasgow, Assistant Attorney General of Tennessee, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was George F. McCanless, Attorney General.
PER CURIAM.
The writ of certiorari is dismissed for want of a properly presented federal question.
U.S. Supreme Court
MACDONALD v. LA SALLE NATIONAL BANK, CONSERVATOR, 355 U.S. 271 (1957)
355 U.S. 271 MACDONALD v. LA SALLE NATIONAL BANK, CONSERVATOR.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS.
No. 504.
Decided December 16, 1957.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 11 Ill. 2d 122, 142 N. E. 2d 58.
Appellant pro se.
John R. Nicholson and Charles M. Nisen for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
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.
