THOMAS W. SYNNOTT, ETC., APPELLANT,
v.
THE TOMBSTONE CONSOLIDATED MINES COMPANY, LIMITED, ETC.

U.S. | 1914-04-13
No. 879
234 U.S. 749 Supreme Court of the United States (1914) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases

Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction upon authority of: 1. Coder v. Arts, 213 U. S. 223, 234-235; Tefft, Weller & Co. v. Munsuri, 222 U. S. 114, 118; 2. Chapman v. Bowen, 207 U. S. 89, 91; Calnan Co. v. Doherty, 224 U. S. 145, 147; 3. Conboy v. First National Bank of Jersey City, 203 U. S. 141, 144-145.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Meeker v. Lehigh Valley R.R. Co., 236 U.S. 412 (U.S. 1915)
    …rates and unjust discrimination. The plaintiff prevailed in the District Court, but the Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the judgment, 211 Fed. Rep. 785, and a writ of [*418] certiorari granted under § 262 of the Judicial Code brings the case here. 234 U. S. 749. The plaintiff was the surviving member of Meeker & Company, a" copartnership, and sued in that capacity. This firm was engaged in the anthracite coal trade in New York City and was accustomed to purchase its coal at; collieries in Pennsylvania and…
  • Spiller v. Atchison, 253 U.S. 117 (U.S. 1920)
    …au Ow Bew v. United States, 144 U. S. 47, 58; In re Chetwood, 165 U. S. 443, 462; Whitney v. Dick, 202 U. S. 132, 135; McClellan v. Carland, 217 U. S. 268, 277, et seq.; United States v. Beatty, 232 U. S. 463, 467; Meeker v. Lehigh Valley R. R. Co., 234 U. S. 749; 236 U. S. 412, 417. Coming to the merits: The ground upon which the Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the judgments, and the ground principally relied upon to sustain its decision, was the refusal by the trial court of a motion made by defendants…
  • …Anticipating that this might be so, the company presented a petition for a writ of certiorari under § 262 of the Judicial Code (see McClellan v. Carland, 217 U. S. 268; United States v. Beatty, 232 U. S. 463, 467; Meeker v. Lehigh Valley R. R. Co., 234 U. S. 749), consideration of which was postponed to the hearing on the appeal. We now grant the petition and treat the record on the appeal as the return to the writ. See Farrell v. O’Brien, 199 U. S. 89, 101; White-Smith Music Co. v. Apollo Co., 209 U. S. 1,…

Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw