EDWARD N. MITTLE
v.
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

U.S. | 1922-12-04
No. 674
260 U.S. 705 Supreme Court of the United States (1922) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 260 U.S. 744
Cited by 2 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Section 237 of the Judicial Code, as amended by the Act of September 6, 1916, c. 448, § 2, 39 Stat. 726; Jett Bros. Distilling Co. v. Carrollton, 252 U. S. 1, 5-6.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Snyder v. Buck, 340 U.S. 15 (U.S. 1950)
    …p. 219. The practice of this Court was therefore to dismiss the writ, leaving undisturbed the judgments below. LeCrone v. McAdoo, supra; United States ex rel. Wattis v. Lane, 255 U. S. 566; Payne v. Industrial Board, 258 U. S. 613; Payne v. Stevens, 260 U. S. 705. In United States ex rel. Claussen v. Curran, supra, and Matheus v. United States ex rel. Cunningham, supra, the Solicitor General had expressed willingness for the successor to be substituted though the statutory period had expired. The Act of Ma…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw