CANNATA ET AL.
v.
CITY OF NEW YORK

U.S. | 1962-10-08
No. 163
Mr. Justice Goldberg took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
371 U.S. 4 Supreme Court of the United States (1962) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Mr. Justice Goldberg took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Gov't OF Guam v. Moylan, 407 F.2d 567 (9th Cir. 1969)
    …der v. District of Columbia, 117 F.Supp. 705, modified and affirmed, sub nom. Berman v. Parker, 348 U.S. 26, 75 S.Ct. 98, 99 L.Ed. 27 (1954); Cf. Cannata et al. v. City of New York, 11 N.Y.2d 210, 227 N.Y.S.2d 903, 182 N.E. 2d 395, appeal dismissed, 371 U.S. 4, 83 S.Ct. 28, 9 L.Ed.2d 48; City of Chicago v. R. Zwick Co., 27 Ill.2d 128, 188 N.E. 2d 489, appeal dismissed, 373 U.S. 542, 83 S.Ct. 1538, 10 L.Ed.2d 687; State ex rel. Allerton Parking Corp. v. City of Cleveland, 4 Ohio App.2d 57, 211 N.E. 2d 203;…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw