VOKES v. CITY OF CHICAGO, 377 U.S. 124 (1964)
U.S. Supreme Court
VOKES v. CITY OF CHICAGO, 377 U.S. 124 (1964) 377 U.S. 124 VOKES ET AL. v. CITY OF CHICAGO.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS.
No. 855.
Decided April 20, 1964.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 28 Ill. 2d 475, 193 N.E.2d 40.
Charles A. Bellows for appellants.
John C. Melaniphy, Sydney R. Drebin and Robert J. Collins 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
378 REALTY CORP. v. NEW YORK RENT & REHAB. ADMIN., 377 U.S. 124 (1964) 377 U.S. 124 378 REALTY CORP. ET AL. v. NEW YORK CITY RENT AND REHABILITATION
ADMINISTRATION ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK. No. 845.
Decided April 20, 1964.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 13 N.Y.2d 902, 193 N.E.2d 510.
Harris L. Present and Irving S. Freedman for appellants.
Beatrice Shainswit 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
VOKES v. CITY OF CHICAGO, 377 U.S. 124 (1964) 377 U.S. 124 VOKES ET AL. v. CITY OF CHICAGO.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS.
No. 855.
Decided April 20, 1964.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 28 Ill. 2d 475, 193 N.E.2d 40.
Charles A. Bellows for appellants.
John C. Melaniphy, Sydney R. Drebin and Robert J. Collins for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Page 377 U.S. 124, 125
U.S. Supreme Court
378 REALTY CORP. v. NEW YORK RENT & REHAB. ADMIN., 377 U.S. 124 (1964) 377 U.S. 124 378 REALTY CORP. ET AL. v. NEW YORK CITY RENT AND REHABILITATION
ADMINISTRATION ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK. No. 845.
Decided April 20, 1964.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 13 N.Y.2d 902, 193 N.E.2d 510.
Harris L. Present and Irving S. Freedman for appellants.
Beatrice Shainswit for appellees.
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.
