ORTEGA
v.
MAGMA COPPER CO.
ORTEGA
MAGMA COPPER CO.
280 U.S. 528
Supreme Court of the United States (1929)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam:
Appeal dismissed for the lack of jurisdiction, upon the authority of § 238 of the Judicial Code, as amended by the act of February 13, 1925 (c. 229, 43 Stat. 936, 938).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
New Jersey v. NEW York, 345 U.S. 369 (U.S. 1953)…nwealth of Pennsylvania immediately petitioned for leave to intervene pro inter esse suo. Leave to intervene was granted, upon condition that the Commonwealth file a statement of her interest in the cause and of the relief, if any, which she sought. 280 U. S. 528. Pennsylvania filed her Statement of Interest and Relief on January 10, 1930, and thereafter became an active party in the proceedings before the Special Master. In 1931, this Court confirmed the Special Master’s Report, 283 U. S. 336, and entered i…
-
Badgley v. The City OF NEW York, 606 F.2d 358 (2d Cir. 1979)…uld substantially harm navigation, water power, sanitation, industrial use, oysters, fish, water supply, agriculture and recreation in the Delaware Valley basin. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was permitted to intervene, New Jersey v. New York I, 280 U.S. 528, 50 S.Ct. 151, 74 L.Ed. 595 (1930), upon filing a Statement of Interest and Relief desired. In its statement Pennsylvania set forth its opposition to the application of the common law doctrine of riparian rights advocated by New Jersey inasmuch as t…1 / 2