SENFOUR INVESTMENT CO., INC. v. KING COUNTY, 385 U.S. 1 (1966)
U.S. Supreme Court
SENFOUR INVESTMENT CO., INC. v. KING COUNTY, 385 U.S. 1 (1966)
385 U.S. 1 SENFOUR INVESTMENT CO., INC. v. KING COUNTY.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF WASHINGTON.
No. 93.
Decided October 10, 1966.
66 Wash. 2d 644, 404 P.2d 760, appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.
Jerome M. Johnson for appellant.
James E. Kennedy and William L. Paul, Jr., for appellee.
Solicitor General Marshall and Philip A. Loomis, Jr., for the United States, as amicus curiae.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.
U.S. Supreme Court
SENFOUR INVESTMENT CO., INC. v. KING COUNTY, 385 U.S. 1 (1966)
385 U.S. 1 SENFOUR INVESTMENT CO., INC. v. KING COUNTY.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF WASHINGTON.
No. 93.
Decided October 10, 1966.
66 Wash. 2d 644, 404 P.2d 760, appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.
Jerome M. Johnson for appellant.
James E. Kennedy and William L. Paul, Jr., for appellee.
Solicitor General Marshall and Philip A. Loomis, Jr., for the United States, as amicus curiae.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.
Page 385 U.S. 1, 2
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.