GREENWALD v. MARYLAND,
363 U.S. 719 (1960)
Annotate this Case
- Syllabus |
- Case
U.S. Supreme Court
GREENWALD v. MARYLAND, 363 U.S. 719 (1960)
363 U.S. 719 GREENWALD v. MARYLAND.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND.
No. 859.
Decided June 20, 1960.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 221 Md. 235, 155 A. 2d 894.
Harry Silbert, A. Jerome Diener and Sidney Schlachman for appellant.
C. Ferdinand Sybert, Attorney General of Maryland, Stedman Prescott, Jr., Deputy Attorney General, and James H. Norris, Jr., Special Assistant Attorney General, 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
ANDERSON v. THORINGTON CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., 363 U.S. 719 (1960)
363 U.S. 719 ANDERSON v. THORINGTON CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA.
No. 878.
Decided June 20, 1960.
Appeal dismissed for want of a properly presented substantial federal question.
Reported below: 201 Va. 266, 110 S. E. 2d 396.
George E. Allen and Seymour I. Toll for appellant.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed for want of a properly presented substantial federal question.
