Could not find header file for oye

 

  • View enhanced case on Westlaw
  • KeyCite this case on Westlaw
  • http://laws.findlaw.com/us/359/534.html
    Cases citing this case: Supreme Court
    Cases citing this case: Circuit Courts
    LAMAR BATH HOUSE CO. v. CITY OF HOT SPRINGS, 359 U.S. 534 (1959)

    U.S. Supreme Court

    LAMAR BATH HOUSE CO. v. CITY OF HOT SPRINGS, 359 U.S. 534 (1959)

    359 U.S. 534

    LAMAR BATH HOUSE CO. ET AL. v. CITY OF HOT SPRINGS ET AL.
    APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS.
    No. 791.
    Decided May 25, 1959.

    Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

    Reported below: 229 Ark. 214, 315 S. W. 2d 884.

    William M. Clark and Richard C. Butler for appellants.

    James W. Chesnutt for appellees.

    PER CURIAM.

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


    CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL & PACIFIC RR. v. ILLINOIS, <a href="/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?friend=oye&court=us&vol=359&invol=534">359 U.S. 534 </a> (1959) 359 U.S. 534 (1959) ">

    U.S. Supreme Court

    CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL & PACIFIC RR. v. ILLINOIS, 359 U.S. 534 (1959)

    359 U.S. 534

    CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL & PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. v. ILLINOIS ET AL.
    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
    ILLINOIS. No. 793.
    Decided May 25, 1959.

    168 F. Supp. 706, affirmed.

    Edwin R. Eckersall and R. K. Merrill for appellant.

    Latham Castle, Attorney General of Illinois, and Harry R. Begley, Special Assistant Attorney General, for the State of Illinois and the Illinois Commerce Commission, and S. Ashley Guthrie and Francis D. Fisher for the Milwaukee Road Commuters' Association, appellees.

    PER CURIAM.

    The motion to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed. [359 U.S. 534, 535]  

    FindLaw Career Center

    Ads by FindLaw