MORRIS
v.
ALABAMA
MORRIS
ALABAMA
302 U.S. 642
Supreme Court of the United States (1937)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Per_curiam
Appeal from the Supreme Court of Alabama.
Per Curiam:
The appeal herein is dismissed (1) for the want of a substantial federal question, Missouri v. Lewis, 101 U. S. 22, 30, 31; Gardner v. Michigan, 199 U. S. 325, 333, 334; Fort Smith Light Co. v. Paving District, 274 U. S. 387, 391; Ohio v. Akron Park District, 281 U. S. 74, 81; (2) for the want of a properly presented federal question, Citizens’ Savings Bank v. Owensboro, 173 U. S. 636, 643; New York v. Kleinert, 268 U. S. 646, 650; White River Co. v. Arkansas, 279 U. S. 692, 700. The motion for leave to proceed further in forma pauperis is denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hughes v. Wis. Tax Comm'n, 304 U.S. 548 (U.S. 1938)…ssed for the want of a properly presented substantial federal question. (1) Hiawassee Power Co. v. Carolina-Tenn. Co., 252 U. S. 341, 344; Whitney v. California, 274 U. S. 357, 360; White River Co. v. Arkansas, 279 U. S. 692, 700; Morris v. Alabama, 302 U. S. 642. (2) Lawrence v. State Tax Commission, 286 U. S. 276, 279-281; New York ex rel. Cohn v. Graves, 300 U. S. 308, 313.…
-
Crescent Creamery, Inc. v. Milk Control Bd., 305 U.S. 559 (U.S. 1938)…Per Curiam: The appeal herein is dismissed as it does not appear from the record that there is a final judgment. J. Bacon & Sons v. Martin, Commissioner of Revenue, 302 U. S. 642.…
-
Dromey v. Wis. Tax Comm'n, 304 U.S. 548 (U.S. 1938)…ssed for the want of a properly presented substantial federal question. (1) Hiawassee Power Co. v. Carolina-Tenn. Co., 252 U. S. 341, 344; Whitney v. California, 274 U. S. 357, 360; White River Co. v. Arkansas, 279 U. S. 692, 700; Morris v. Alabama, 302 U. S. 642; (2) Lawrence v. State Tax Commission, 286 U. S. 276, 279-281; New York ex rel. Cohn v. Graves, 300 [*549] U. S. 308, 313; Mitchell v. United States, 21 Wall. 350, 353. Mr. S. W. Jensch for appellant. Mr. Joseph E. Messerschmidt for respondents.…
Authorities Cited
- Missouri v. Lewis, 101 U.S. 22 (U.S. 1879)
- Ohio ex rel. Bryant v. Akron Metro. Park Dist., 281 U.S. 74 (U.S. 1930)
- Citizens' Sav. Bank of Owensboro v. Owensboro, 173 U.S. 636 (U.S. 1899)
- White River Lumber Co. v. Arkansas Ex rel. Applegate, 279 U.S. 692 (U.S. 1929)
- Fort Smith Light & Traction Co. v. Bd. OF Improvement OF Paving Dist. NO. 16 OF THE City OF Fort Smith, 274 U.S. 387 (U.S. 1927)
- People of the State of N.Y. Ex rel. Rosevale Realty Co. v. Kleinert, 268 U.S. 646 (U.S. 1925)
- Gardner v. Michigan, 199 U.S. 325 (U.S. 1905)