FORD MOTOR CO. v. PACE, 364 U.S. 444 (1960)
FORD MOTOR CO. v. PACE ET AL. U.S. Supreme Court
FORD MOTOR CO. v. PACE, 364 U.S. 444 (1960) 364 U.S. 444
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE.
No. 431.
Decided November 21, 1960.
Appeal dismissed for want of a properly presented federal question.
Reported below: 206 Tenn. 559, 335 S.W.2d 360.
William T. Gossett, L. Homer Surbeck and Cecil Sims for appellant.
K. Harland Dodson, Jr. for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a properly presented federal question.
U.S. Supreme Court
DART DRUG CORP. OF MARYLAND v. GADOL, 364 U.S. 444 (1960) 364 U.S. 444 DART DRUG CORP. OF MARYLAND ET AL. v. GADOL ET AL., DOING BUSINESS AS
FOUR CORNERS PHARMACY.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No. 435.
Decided November 21, 1960.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 222 Md. 372, 161 A.2d 122.
Milton M. Gottesman for appellants.
Joseph S. Kaufman and Stedman Prescott, Jr. for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
U.S. Supreme Court
FORD MOTOR CO. v. PACE, 364 U.S. 444 (1960) 364 U.S. 444 FORD MOTOR CO. v. PACE ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE.
No. 431.
Decided November 21, 1960.
Appeal dismissed for want of a properly presented federal question.
Reported below: 206 Tenn. 559, 335 S.W.2d 360.
William T. Gossett, L. Homer Surbeck and Cecil Sims for appellant.
K. Harland Dodson, Jr. for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a properly presented federal question.
U.S. Supreme Court
DART DRUG CORP. OF MARYLAND v. GADOL, 364 U.S. 444 (1960) 364 U.S. 444 DART DRUG CORP. OF MARYLAND ET AL. v. GADOL ET AL., DOING BUSINESS AS
FOUR CORNERS PHARMACY.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No. 435.
Decided November 21, 1960.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 222 Md. 372, 161 A.2d 122.
Milton M. Gottesman for appellants.
Joseph S. Kaufman and Stedman Prescott, Jr. for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Page 364 U.S. 444, 445
