RUDNICKI v. COX, 372 U.S. 226 (1963)
U.S. Supreme Court
RUDNICKI v. COX, 372 U.S. 226 (1963)
372 U.S. 226 RUDNICKI v. COX ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF
MASSACHUSETTS. No. 706.
Decided February 18, 1963.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed.
U.S. Supreme Court
BOARD CTY. COMM'RS, JEFFERSON v. CITY & CTY., DENVER, 372 U.S. 226 (1963)
372 U.S. 226 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO, ET AL. v.
CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLORADO, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO. No. 635.
Decided February 18, 1963.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 150 Colo. 198, 372 P.2d 152.
Charles Ginsberg for appellants.
Robert S. Wham, Richard P. Matsch, Charles S. Rhyne, Brice W. Rhyne and Alfred J. Tighe, Jr. for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
MR. JUSTICE WHITE took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
U.S. Supreme Court
RUDNICKI v. COX, 372 U.S. 226 (1963)
372 U.S. 226 RUDNICKI v. COX ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF
MASSACHUSETTS. No. 706.
Decided February 18, 1963.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed.
U.S. Supreme Court
BOARD CTY. COMM'RS, JEFFERSON v. CITY & CTY., DENVER, 372 U.S. 226 (1963)
372 U.S. 226 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO, ET AL. v.
CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLORADO, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO. No. 635.
Decided February 18, 1963.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 150 Colo. 198, 372 P.2d 152.
Charles Ginsberg for appellants.
Robert S. Wham, Richard P. Matsch, Charles S. Rhyne, Brice W. Rhyne and Alfred J. Tighe, Jr. for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
MR. JUSTICE WHITE took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
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.
