WOODS v. CALIFORNIA, 394 U.S. 320 (1969)

U.S. Supreme Court

WOODS v. CALIFORNIA, 394 U.S. 320 (1969) 394 U.S. 320

WOODS v. CALIFORNIA.
APPEAL FROM THE APPELLATE DEPARTMENT, SUPERIOR
COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES. No. 1006.
Decided March 24, 1969.

Appeal dismissed.

Burton Marks for appellant.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

BOEING CO. v. HAMM, <a href="/cases/federal/us/394/320/">394 U.S. 320</a> (1969) 394 U.S. 320 (1969) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

BOEING CO. v. HAMM, 394 U.S. 320 (1969) 394 U.S. 320

BOEING CO. v. HAMM, COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE OF ALABAMA.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA.
No. 1017.
Decided March 24, 1969.

283 Ala. 310, 216 So. 2d 288, appeal dismissed.

John Bingham for appellant.

MacDonald Gallion, Attorney General of Alabama, and Willard W. Livingston and William H. Burton, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Page 394 U.S. 320, 321

 


U.S. Supreme Court

WOODS v. CALIFORNIA, 394 U.S. 320 (1969) 394 U.S. 320

WOODS v. CALIFORNIA.
APPEAL FROM THE APPELLATE DEPARTMENT, SUPERIOR
COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES. No. 1006.
Decided March 24, 1969.

Appeal dismissed.

Burton Marks for appellant.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

BOEING CO. v. HAMM, <a href="/cases/federal/us/394/320/"><a class="related-case" href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/394/320/"><a class="related-case" href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/394/320/">394 U.S. 320</a></a></a> (1969) 394 U.S. 320 (1969) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

BOEING CO. v. HAMM, 394 U.S. 320 (1969) 394 U.S. 320

BOEING CO. v. HAMM, COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE OF ALABAMA.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA.
No. 1017.
Decided March 24, 1969.

283 Ala. 310, 216 So. 2d 288, appeal dismissed.

John Bingham for appellant.

MacDonald Gallion, Attorney General of Alabama, and Willard W. Livingston and William H. Burton, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Page 394 U.S. 320, 321

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.