SIEGEL v. ASSOCIATION OF THE BAR OF THE CITY, NEW YORK, 359 U.S. 552 (1959)

U.S. Supreme Court

SIEGEL v. ASSOCIATION OF THE BAR OF THE CITY, NEW YORK, 359 U.S. 552 (1959)

359 U.S. 552

SIEGEL ET AL. v. ASSOCIATION OF THE BAR OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
No. 773.
Decided June 1, 1959.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 5 N. Y. 2d 707, 708.

William G. Mulligan for appellants.

Frank H. Gordon for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.


OHIO v. DAYTON POWER & LIGHT CO., <a href="/cases/federal/us/359/552/case.html">359 U.S. 552</a> (1959) 359 U.S. 552 (1959) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

OHIO v. DAYTON POWER & LIGHT CO., 359 U.S. 552 (1959)

359 U.S. 552

OHIO EX REL. KLAPP, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY, v. DAYTON POWER & LIGHT CO.
ET AL.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 851.
Decided June 1, 1959.

Certiorari granted and judgment reversed.

Reported below: 263 F.2d 909.

Robert Houston French, Haveth E. Mau and R. K. Wilson for petitioner.

Julian de Bruyn Kops for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit is reversed. Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 3 Cranch 267; Removal Cases, 100 U.S. 457; Indianapolis v. Chase National Bank, 314 U.S. 63.

Page 359 U.S. 552, 1




U.S. Supreme Court

SIEGEL v. ASSOCIATION OF THE BAR OF THE CITY, NEW YORK, 359 U.S. 552 (1959)

359 U.S. 552

SIEGEL ET AL. v. ASSOCIATION OF THE BAR OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
No. 773.
Decided June 1, 1959.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 5 N. Y. 2d 707, 708.

William G. Mulligan for appellants.

Frank H. Gordon for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.


OHIO v. DAYTON POWER & LIGHT CO., <a href="/cases/federal/us/359/552/case.html">359 U.S. 552</a> (1959) 359 U.S. 552 (1959) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

OHIO v. DAYTON POWER & LIGHT CO., 359 U.S. 552 (1959)

359 U.S. 552

OHIO EX REL. KLAPP, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY, v. DAYTON POWER & LIGHT CO.
ET AL.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 851.
Decided June 1, 1959.

Certiorari granted and judgment reversed.

Reported below: 263 F.2d 909.

Robert Houston French, Haveth E. Mau and R. K. Wilson for petitioner.

Julian de Bruyn Kops for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit is reversed. Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 3 Cranch 267; Removal Cases, 100 U.S. 457; Indianapolis v. Chase National Bank, 314 U.S. 63.

Page 359 U.S. 552, 1

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.