STADLER v. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF CALIFORNIA, 380 U.S. 252 (1965)

Syllabus

U.S. Supreme Court

STADLER v. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF CALIFORNIA, 380 U.S. 252 (1965) 380 U.S. 252

STADLER ET AL., EXECUTORS v. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF CALIFORNIA.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE
DISTRICT. No. 797.
Decided March 8, 1965.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below. 227 Cal. App. 2d 314, 38 Cal. Rptr. 587.

Theodore W. Russell and R. Y. Schureman for appellants.

Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, Dan Kaufman, Assistant Attorney General, and Neal J. Gobar, Deputy Attorney General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 380 U.S. 252, 253

 



Opinions

U.S. Supreme Court

STADLER v. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF CALIFORNIA, 380 U.S. 252 (1965) 380 U.S. 252 STADLER ET AL., EXECUTORS v. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF CALIFORNIA.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE
DISTRICT. No. 797.
Decided March 8, 1965.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below. 227 Cal. App. 2d 314, 38 Cal. Rptr. 587.

Theodore W. Russell and R. Y. Schureman for appellants.

Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, Dan Kaufman, Assistant Attorney General, and Neal J. Gobar, Deputy Attorney General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

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

Page 380 U.S. 252, 253