WILLARD H. STIMSON ET AL.
v.
CITY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL.

U.S. | 1924-03-03
No. 162
264 U.S. 569 Supreme Court of the United States (1924) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

Reversed with costs; and cause remanded with directions to dismiss for lack of a substantial federal question. Pacific Electric Ry. Co. v. Los Angeles, 194 U. S. 112, 118; South Covington Ry. Co. v. Newport, 259 U. S. 97, 99; Blumenstock Bros. v. Curtis Publishing Co., 252 U. S. 436, 441.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • McCORMICK & Co., Inc. v. Brown, 286 U.S. 131 (U.S. 1932)
    …. 291, affirmed 263 U. S. 685, 686; Weisengoff v. Maryland, 143 Md. 638; 123 Atl. 107, affirmed 263 U. S. 685, 686; Colora v. New Jersey, 97 N. J. Law 316; 117 Atl. 702, affirmed 267 U. S. 576. In Idaho v. Moore, 36 Idaho 565; 212 Pac. 349, affirmed 264 U. S. 569, Moore was convicted of having intoxicating liquor in his private dwelling in violation of the state law, notwithstanding the stipulation that his possession was “ permitted by and lawful under the provisions of section 33 of the National Prohibitio…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw