CLIMATE CONTROL, INC. v. HILL, 364 U.S. 409 (1960)

U.S. Supreme Court

CLIMATE CONTROL, INC. v. HILL, 364 U.S. 409 (1960) 364 U.S. 409

CLIMATE CONTROL, INC., v. HILL ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA.
No. 251.
Decided November 14, 1960.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 86 Ariz. 180, 342 P.2d 854; 87 Ariz. 201, 349 P.2d 771.

William R. Meagher for appellant.

William W. Stevenson, Samuel H. Morris, Richard M. Fennemore, Daniel E. Cracchiolo, J. A. Riggins, Jr., Denison Kitchel, Francis J. Ryley, Ivan Robinette, Edward Jacobson, Howard Twitty, John R. Franks and Richard G. Kleindienst for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

BOBO v. MAYOR & COUNCILMEN OF SAVANNAH BEACH, <a href="/cases/federal/us/364/409/case.html">364 U.S. 409</a> (1960) 364 U.S. 409 (1960) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

BOBO v. MAYOR & COUNCILMEN OF SAVANNAH BEACH, 364 U.S. 409 (1960) 364 U.S. 409

BOBO v. MAYOR & COUNCILMEN OF SAVANNAH BEACH, GEORGIA.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA.
No. 409.
Decided November 14, 1960.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 216 Ga. 12, 114 S.E.2d 374.

Erwin A. Friedman for appellant.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Page 364 U.S. 409, 410

 


U.S. Supreme Court

CLIMATE CONTROL, INC. v. HILL, 364 U.S. 409 (1960) 364 U.S. 409

CLIMATE CONTROL, INC., v. HILL ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA.
No. 251.
Decided November 14, 1960.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 86 Ariz. 180, 342 P.2d 854; 87 Ariz. 201, 349 P.2d 771.

William R. Meagher for appellant.

William W. Stevenson, Samuel H. Morris, Richard M. Fennemore, Daniel E. Cracchiolo, J. A. Riggins, Jr., Denison Kitchel, Francis J. Ryley, Ivan Robinette, Edward Jacobson, Howard Twitty, John R. Franks and Richard G. Kleindienst for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

BOBO v. MAYOR & COUNCILMEN OF SAVANNAH BEACH, <a href="/cases/federal/us/364/409/case.html"><a class="related-case" href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/364/409/"><a class="related-case" href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/364/409/">364 U.S. 409</a></a></a> (1960) 364 U.S. 409 (1960) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

BOBO v. MAYOR & COUNCILMEN OF SAVANNAH BEACH, 364 U.S. 409 (1960) 364 U.S. 409

BOBO v. MAYOR & COUNCILMEN OF SAVANNAH BEACH, GEORGIA.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA.
No. 409.
Decided November 14, 1960.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 216 Ga. 12, 114 S.E.2d 374.

Erwin A. Friedman for appellant.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Page 364 U.S. 409, 410

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.