GULFPORT FARM & PASTURE CO. v. HANCOCK BANK, 358 U.S. 67 (1958)
U.S. Supreme Court
GULFPORT FARM & PASTURE CO. v. HANCOCK BANK, 358 U.S. 67 (1958) 358 U.S. 67 GULFPORT FARM & PASTURE CO. v. HANCOCK BANK.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI.
No. 390.
Decided November 10, 1958.
Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.
Reported below: 232 Miss. 289, 98 So. 2d 862.
Edward I. Jones for appellant.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.
U.S. Supreme Court
LATHAM v. ECKLE, 358 U.S. 67 (1958) 358 U.S. 67 LATHAM v. ECKLE, SUPERINTENDENT, LONDON PRISON FARM.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO.
No. 190, Misc.
Decided November 10, 1958.
Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.
Reported below: 168 Ohio St. 14, 150 N.E.2d 857.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.
MR. JUSTICE STEWART took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
U.S. Supreme Court
GULFPORT FARM & PASTURE CO. v. HANCOCK BANK, 358 U.S. 67 (1958) 358 U.S. 67 GULFPORT FARM & PASTURE CO. v. HANCOCK BANK.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI.
No. 390.
Decided November 10, 1958.
Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.
Reported below: 232 Miss. 289, 98 So. 2d 862.
Edward I. Jones for appellant.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.
U.S. Supreme Court
LATHAM v. ECKLE, 358 U.S. 67 (1958) 358 U.S. 67 LATHAM v. ECKLE, SUPERINTENDENT, LONDON PRISON FARM.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO.
No. 190, Misc.
Decided November 10, 1958.
Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.
Reported below: 168 Ohio St. 14, 150 N.E.2d 857.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.
MR. JUSTICE STEWART took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Page 358 U.S. 67, 68
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.
