McGEE v. CROUSE, 382 U.S. 67 (1965)
U.S. Supreme Court
McGEE v. CROUSE, 382 U.S. 67 (1965) 382 U.S. 67 McGEE v. CROUSE, WARDEN.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS.
No. 550, Misc.
Decided November 8, 1965.
Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.
U.S. Supreme Court
ANDREWS VAN LINES, INC. v. UNITED STATES, 382 U.S. 67 (1965) 382 U.S. 67 ANDREWS VAN LINES, INC., ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA.
No. 438.
Decided November 8, 1965.
240 F. Supp. 763, affirmed.
J. Max Harding for appellants.
Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Robert B. Hummel, Gerald Kadish, Robert W. Ginnane and Thomas H. Ploss for the United States et al.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.
MR. JUSTICE STEWART is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.
U.S. Supreme Court
McGEE v. CROUSE, 382 U.S. 67 (1965) 382 U.S. 67 McGEE v. CROUSE, WARDEN.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS.
No. 550, Misc.
Decided November 8, 1965.
Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.
Page 382 U.S. 67, 68
U.S. Supreme Court
ANDREWS VAN LINES, INC. v. UNITED STATES, 382 U.S. 67 (1965) 382 U.S. 67 ANDREWS VAN LINES, INC., ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA.
No. 438.
Decided November 8, 1965.
240 F. Supp. 763, affirmed.
J. Max Harding for appellants.
Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Robert B. Hummel, Gerald Kadish, Robert W. Ginnane and Thomas H. Ploss for the United States et al.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.
MR. JUSTICE STEWART is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.
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.
