CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT CO. ET AL.
v.
TEXAS
CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT CO. ET AL.
TEXAS
319 U.S. 727
Supreme Court of the United States (1943)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam:
The appeal is dismissed for the want of a substantial federal question. H. E. Butt Grocery Co. v. Sheppard, 311 U. S. 608, and cases cited.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Graham Mortg. Corp., 740 F.2d 414 (6th Cir. 1984)…is argument is that, as the government concedes, the meaning of the term “service” varies depending upon the context in which the term is used. See, e.g., Central Power & Light Co. v. State, 165 S.W. 2d 920, 925 (Tex.Civ.App.1942), appeal dismissed, 319 U.S. 727, 63 S.Ct. 1033, 87 L.Ed. 1691 (1943). The government cites no authority in support of its contention that “service” is used in § 3(3) of RESPA in the sense that it urges is an ordinary meaning of the term. In the one case cited by the government,…
Authorities Cited
- Horne v. City of Ocala, 311 U.S. 608 (U.S. 1940)
- Luckenbach Terminals, Inc. v. Twp. of N. Bergen, 311 U.S. 608 (U.S. 1940)