SPROWAL v. NEW YORK, 385 U.S. 649 (1967)
U.S. Supreme Court
SPROWAL v. NEW YORK, 385 U.S. 649 (1967) 385 U.S. 649 SPROWAL v. NEW YORK.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
No. 825.
Decided January 23, 1967.
Appeal dismissed.
Carl Rachlin for appellant.
Frank S. Hogan for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.
U.S. Supreme Court
FEIN v. NEW YORK, 385 U.S. 649 (1967) 385 U.S. 649 FEIN v. NEW YORK.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
No. 793.
Decided January 23, 1967.
18 N.Y.2d 162, 219 N.E.2d 274, appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.
Louis Nizer, Paul Martinson and Bennett Boskey for appellant.
Frank S. Hogan for appellee.
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.
MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.
U.S. Supreme Court
SPROWAL v. NEW YORK, 385 U.S. 649 (1967) 385 U.S. 649 SPROWAL v. NEW YORK.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
No. 825.
Decided January 23, 1967.
Appeal dismissed.
Carl Rachlin for appellant.
Frank S. Hogan for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.
Page 385 U.S. 649, 650
U.S. Supreme Court
FEIN v. NEW YORK, 385 U.S. 649 (1967) 385 U.S. 649 FEIN v. NEW YORK.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
No. 793.
Decided January 23, 1967.
18 N.Y.2d 162, 219 N.E.2d 274, appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.
Louis Nizer, Paul Martinson and Bennett Boskey for appellant.
Frank S. Hogan for appellee.
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.
MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS 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.
