HERRON v. UNITED STATES, 366 U.S. 715 (1961)

Justia Opinion Summary and Annotations
Read more

U.S. Supreme Court

HERRON v. UNITED STATES, 366 U.S. 715 (1961)

366 U.S. 715

HERRON v. UNITED STATES.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON.
No. 791.
Decided May 29, 1961.

Appeal dismissed.

Reported below: ___ F. Supp. ___.

Appellant pro se.

Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Orrick and Alan S. Rosenthal for the United States.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed.

HOLEKAMP v. HOLEKAMP LUMBER CO., <a href="/cases/federal/us/366/715/case.html">366 U.S. 715</a> (1961) 366 U.S. 715 (1961) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

HOLEKAMP v. HOLEKAMP LUMBER CO., 366 U.S. 715 (1961)

366 U.S. 715

HOLEKAMP ET AL. v. HOLEKAMP LUMBER CO. ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI.
No. 870.
Decided May 29, 1961.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 340 S. W. 2d 678.

Donald E. Fahey for appellants.

Eugene H. Buder for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 366 U.S. 715, 716




U.S. Supreme Court

HERRON v. UNITED STATES, 366 U.S. 715 (1961)

366 U.S. 715

HERRON v. UNITED STATES.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON.
No. 791.
Decided May 29, 1961.

Appeal dismissed.

Reported below: ___ F. Supp. ___.

Appellant pro se.

Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Orrick and Alan S. Rosenthal for the United States.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed.

HOLEKAMP v. HOLEKAMP LUMBER CO., <a href="/cases/federal/us/366/715/case.html">366 U.S. 715</a> (1961) 366 U.S. 715 (1961) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

HOLEKAMP v. HOLEKAMP LUMBER CO., 366 U.S. 715 (1961)

366 U.S. 715

HOLEKAMP ET AL. v. HOLEKAMP LUMBER CO. ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI.
No. 870.
Decided May 29, 1961.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 340 S. W. 2d 678.

Donald E. Fahey for appellants.

Eugene H. Buder for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 366 U.S. 715, 716

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.