TIETZ v. MARIENTHAL
385 U.S. 8 (1966)
Annotate this Case
- Syllabus |
- Case
U.S. Supreme Court
TIETZ v. MARIENTHAL, 385 U.S. 8 (1966)
385 U.S. 8 TIETZ ET AL. v. MARIENTHAL ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND
APPELLATE DISTRICT. No. 217.
Decided October 10, 1966.
238 Cal. App. 2d 905, 48 Cal. Rptr. 245, appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.
J. B. Tietz for appellants.
Harold W. Kennedy and Henry F. Walker for appellees.
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
REYNOLDS v. LA. BOARD OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL, 385 U.S. 8 (1966)
385 U.S. 8 REYNOLDS, DBA LARRY & KATZ, ET AL. v. LOUISIANA BOARD OF ALCOHOLIC
BEVERAGE CONTROL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA. No. 229.
Decided October 10, 1966.
248 La. 639, 181 So.2d 377, appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.
Saul Stone and Paul O. H. Pigman for appellants.
George A. Bourgeois, Clem H. Sehrt and Peter J. Butler 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.