JOHN BOYD, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS

U.S. | 1908-03-09
No. 151
209 U.S. 539 Supreme Court of the United States (1908) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

In error to the Court of Criminal Appeals of the State of Texas.

Writ of error dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Leeper v. Texas, 139 U. S. 462; Duncan v. Missouri, 152 U. S. 377, 382; Gibson v. Mississippi, 162 U. S. 565, 590; Allen v. Georgia, 166 U. S. 138; Brown v. New Jersey, 175 U. S. 172; Layton v. Missouri, 187 U. S. 356; Rogers v. Peck, 199 U. S. 425; case below, 96 S. W. Rep. 1079.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Wells v. J. C. Penney Co., 250 F.2d 221 (9th Cir. 1957)
    …136 Fla. 184, 186 So. 176, 121 A.L.R. 715; Fuller v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 70 Conn. 647, 41 A. 4; and United States Life Ins. Co. v. Spinks, 29 Ky.Law Rep. 960, 13 L.R.A.,N.S., 1053, rehearing denied 126 Ky. 405, 103 S.W. 335, appeal dismissed 209 U.S. 539, 28 S.Ct. 569, 52 L.Ed. 917. The last four of these cases directly involved insurance contracts containing some type of “tontine” provision. The word “tontine” is defined in 1 Bouvier’s Law Diet., Rawles Third Revision, page 1621: “Tontine. A syst…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw