MOYA v. DeBACA, 395 U.S. 825 (1969)

Justia Opinion Summary and Annotations
Read more

U.S. Supreme Court

MOYA v. DeBACA, 395 U.S. 825 (1969)

395 U.S. 825

MOYA ET UX. v. DeBACA, DBA DeBACA & CO. CREDIT & COLLECTION AGENCY, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO.
No. 996, Misc.
Decided June 23, 1969.

286 F. Supp. 606, appeal dismissed.

William G. Fitzpatrick, Jr., for appellants.

Claud S. Mann for DeBaca et al., and Boston E. Witt, Attorney General, and James V. Noble, Assistant Attorney General, for the State of New Mexico, appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN would vacate the judgment and remand the case in light of Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp. of Bay View, ante, p. 337.

DILLARD v. FAMILY COURT, <a href="/cases/federal/us/395/825/case.html">395 U.S. 825</a> (1969) 395 U.S. 825 (1969) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

DILLARD v. FAMILY COURT, 395 U.S. 825 (1969)

395 U.S. 825

DILLARD v. FAMILY COURT, QUEENS COUNTY, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF
NEW YORK. No. 1939, Misc.
Decided June 23, 1969.

Appeal dismissed.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Page 395 U.S. 825, 826




U.S. Supreme Court

MOYA v. DeBACA, 395 U.S. 825 (1969)

395 U.S. 825

MOYA ET UX. v. DeBACA, DBA DeBACA & CO. CREDIT & COLLECTION AGENCY, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO.
No. 996, Misc.
Decided June 23, 1969.

286 F. Supp. 606, appeal dismissed.

William G. Fitzpatrick, Jr., for appellants.

Claud S. Mann for DeBaca et al., and Boston E. Witt, Attorney General, and James V. Noble, Assistant Attorney General, for the State of New Mexico, appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN would vacate the judgment and remand the case in light of Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp. of Bay View, ante, p. 337.

DILLARD v. FAMILY COURT, <a href="/cases/federal/us/395/825/case.html">395 U.S. 825</a> (1969) 395 U.S. 825 (1969) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

DILLARD v. FAMILY COURT, 395 U.S. 825 (1969)

395 U.S. 825

DILLARD v. FAMILY COURT, QUEENS COUNTY, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF
NEW YORK. No. 1939, Misc.
Decided June 23, 1969.

Appeal dismissed.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Page 395 U.S. 825, 826

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.