DAVIS v. CITY OF BOWLING GREEN, 375 U.S. 43 (1963)
U.S. Supreme Court
DAVIS v. CITY OF BOWLING GREEN, 375 U.S. 43 (1963) 375 U.S. 43 DAVIS ET AL. v. CITY OF BOWLING GREEN, KENTUCKY, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF
KENTUCKY. No. 331.
Decided October 21, 1963.
Judgment affirmed.
Albert O. Scafuro for appellants.
Squire R. Ogden for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.
U.S. Supreme Court
HUMBLE OIL & REFINING CO. v. MALE, 375 U.S. 43 (1963) 375 U.S. 43 HUMBLE OIL & REFINING CO. ET AL. v. MALE, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT
OF LABOR & INDUSTRY, NEW JERSEY.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY. No. 326.
Decided October 21, 1963.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
T. Girard Wharton and John W. Fritz for appellants.
Arthur J. Sills, Attorney General of New Jersey, and Theodore I. Botter, First Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
U.S. Supreme Court
DAVIS v. CITY OF BOWLING GREEN, 375 U.S. 43 (1963) 375 U.S. 43 DAVIS ET AL. v. CITY OF BOWLING GREEN, KENTUCKY, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF
KENTUCKY. No. 331.
Decided October 21, 1963.
Judgment affirmed.
Albert O. Scafuro for appellants.
Squire R. Ogden for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.
Page 375 U.S. 43, 44
U.S. Supreme Court
HUMBLE OIL & REFINING CO. v. MALE, 375 U.S. 43 (1963) 375 U.S. 43 HUMBLE OIL & REFINING CO. ET AL. v. MALE, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT
OF LABOR & INDUSTRY, NEW JERSEY.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY. No. 326.
Decided October 21, 1963.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
T. Girard Wharton and John W. Fritz for appellants.
Arthur J. Sills, Attorney General of New Jersey, and Theodore I. Botter, First Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
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.
