CORPORA v. NEW YORK, 380 U.S. 520 (1965)

U.S. Supreme Court

CORPORA v. NEW YORK, 380 U.S. 520 (1965)

380 U.S. 520

CORPORA v. NEW YORK.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
No. 934.
Decided April 26, 1965.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Emanuel Redfield for appellant.

Frank S. Hogan and H. Richard Uviller 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. 520, 521


GOLD v. DiCARLO, <a href="/cases/federal/us/380/520/case.html">380 U.S. 520</a> (1965) 380 U.S. 520 (1965) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

GOLD v. DiCARLO, 380 U.S. 520 (1965)

380 U.S. 520

GOLD ET AL. v. DiCARLO, COMMISSIONER OF LICENSES OF CITY OF NEW YORK,
ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 901.
Decided April 26, 1965.

235 F. Supp. 817, affirmed.

Jesse Moss for appellants.

Leo A. Larkin and Seymour B. Quel for DiCarlo, and Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, pro se, Samuel A. Hirshowitz, First Assistant Attorney General, and Lester Esterman, Assistant Attorney General, for Lefkowitz, appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.




U.S. Supreme Court

CORPORA v. NEW YORK, 380 U.S. 520 (1965)

380 U.S. 520

CORPORA v. NEW YORK.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
No. 934.
Decided April 26, 1965.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Emanuel Redfield for appellant.

Frank S. Hogan and H. Richard Uviller 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. 520, 521


GOLD v. DiCARLO, <a href="/cases/federal/us/380/520/case.html">380 U.S. 520</a> (1965) 380 U.S. 520 (1965) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

GOLD v. DiCARLO, 380 U.S. 520 (1965)

380 U.S. 520

GOLD ET AL. v. DiCARLO, COMMISSIONER OF LICENSES OF CITY OF NEW YORK,
ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. No. 901.
Decided April 26, 1965.

235 F. Supp. 817, affirmed.

Jesse Moss for appellants.

Leo A. Larkin and Seymour B. Quel for DiCarlo, and Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, pro se, Samuel A. Hirshowitz, First Assistant Attorney General, and Lester Esterman, Assistant Attorney General, for Lefkowitz, appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.

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.