UNITED STATES
v.
W. A. MCFARLAND AND J. NORRIS MCFARLAND, COPARTNERS

U.S. | 1927-10-17
No. 157
275 U.S. 485 Supreme Court of the United States (1927) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

The decision of this case does not require a decision of the questions which are -presented in the petition for certiorari because of which the writ was granted, and the certiorari heretofore granted in this case is therefore revoked upon the authority of Southern Power Co. v. North Carolina Service Co., 263 U. S. 508.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • United States v. Smith, 39 F.2d 851 (1st Cir. 1930)
    …to the Supreme Court on certiorari, assigning as one ground of error-that the regulations had been field to be invalid ; but, when counsel for the government in argument admitted that they were unauthorized, the case was dismissed with a per curiam. 275 U. S. 485, 48 S. Ct. 27, 72 L. Ed. 386. In the ease of United States v. Avery, 30 F.(2d) 728, the District Court field, following the McFarland Case, that the profiteering provision was in the nature of a penalty, and the contention of the government that Co…
  • United States v. Avery (N.D.N.Y. 1927)
    …arisen in these cases. That is U. S. v. McFarland et al. (C. C. A.) 15 F.(2d) 823. Writ of certiorari in this ease, previously granted by the United States Supreme Court (273 U. S. 688, 47 S. Ct. 449, 71 L. Ed. 841), was revoked on October 17, 1927 (275 U. S. 485, 48 S. Ct. 27, 72 L. Ed. 386), with the following statement: “Per Curiam. The decision of this ease does not require a decision of the questions which are presented in the petition for certiorari because of which the writ was granted, and the certi…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw