DUNN v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, 357 U.S. 344 (1958)

U.S. Supreme Court

DUNN v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, 357 U.S. 344 (1958)

357 U.S. 344

DUNN ET AL. v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE
DISTRICT. No. 952.
Decided June 23, 1958.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Reported below: 155 Cal. App. 2d 789, 318 P.2d 795.

Henry W. Robinson for appellants.

Harold W. Kennedy for the County of Los Angeles, appellee.

Roger J. Whiteford, John J. Wilson, Oscar John Dorwin and Ray A. Pittman, Jr., for the Texas Company, appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The motions to dismiss are granted and the appeal is dismissed. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.

Page 357 U.S. 344, 345

 


U.S. Supreme Court

DUNN v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, 357 U.S. 344 (1958)

357 U.S. 344

DUNN ET AL. v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE
DISTRICT. No. 952.
Decided June 23, 1958.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Reported below: 155 Cal. App. 2d 789, 318 P.2d 795.

Henry W. Robinson for appellants.

Harold W. Kennedy for the County of Los Angeles, appellee.

Roger J. Whiteford, John J. Wilson, Oscar John Dorwin and Ray A. Pittman, Jr., for the Texas Company, appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The motions to dismiss are granted and the appeal is dismissed. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.

Page 357 U.S. 344, 345

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.