SNYDER v. TOWN OF NEWTOWN, 365 U.S. 299 (1961)

Justia Opinion Summary and Annotations
Read more

U.S. Supreme Court

SNYDER v. TOWN OF NEWTOWN, 365 U.S. 299 (1961) 365 U.S. 299

SNYDER ET AL. v. TOWN OF NEWTOWN ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ERRORS OF CONNECTICUT.
No. 580.
Decided February 20, 1961.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 147 Conn. 374, 161 A. 2d 770.

Philip Reich for appellants.

James J. O'Connell and Albert L. Coles for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER and MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.

CORDAK v. REUBEN H. DONNELLEY CORP., <a href="/cases/federal/us/365/299/case.html">365 U.S. 299</a> (1961) 365 U.S. 299 (1961) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

CORDAK v. REUBEN H. DONNELLEY CORP., 365 U.S. 299 (1961) 365 U.S. 299

CORDAK, DOING BUSINESS AS A. B. DENTAL PLATE LABORATORY, ET AL. v. REUBEN
H. DONNELLEY CORP. ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS. No. 582.
Decided February 20, 1961.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 20 Ill. 2d 153, 169 N. E. 2d 321.

John Paul Stevens for appellants.

Owen Rall for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 365 U.S. 299, 300




U.S. Supreme Court

SNYDER v. TOWN OF NEWTOWN, 365 U.S. 299 (1961) 365 U.S. 299

SNYDER ET AL. v. TOWN OF NEWTOWN ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ERRORS OF CONNECTICUT.
No. 580.
Decided February 20, 1961.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 147 Conn. 374, 161 A. 2d 770.

Philip Reich for appellants.

James J. O'Connell and Albert L. Coles for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER and MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.

CORDAK v. REUBEN H. DONNELLEY CORP., <a href="/cases/federal/us/365/299/case.html">365 U.S. 299</a> (1961) 365 U.S. 299 (1961) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

CORDAK v. REUBEN H. DONNELLEY CORP., 365 U.S. 299 (1961) 365 U.S. 299

CORDAK, DOING BUSINESS AS A. B. DENTAL PLATE LABORATORY, ET AL. v. REUBEN
H. DONNELLEY CORP. ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS. No. 582.
Decided February 20, 1961.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 20 Ill. 2d 153, 169 N. E. 2d 321.

John Paul Stevens for appellants.

Owen Rall for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 365 U.S. 299, 300

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.