• View enhanced case on Westlaw
  • KeyCite this case on Westlaw
  • http://laws.findlaw.com/us/393/321.html
    Cases citing this case: Supreme Court
    Cases citing this case: Circuit Courts
    HILLIARD v. CITY OF GAINESVILLE, 393 U.S. 321 (1969)

    U.S. Supreme Court

    HILLIARD v. CITY OF GAINESVILLE, 393 U.S. 321 (1969)

    393 U.S. 321

    HILLIARD v. CITY OF GAINESVILLE.
    APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA.
    No. 745.
    Decided January 13, 1969.

    213 So.2d 689, appeal dismissed.

    Richard W. Wilson for appellant.

    Osee R. Fagan for appellee.

    PER CURIAM.

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

    MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.


    MID-VALLEY PIPELINE CO. v. KING, <a href="/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=393&invol=321">393 U.S. 321 </a> (1969) 393 U.S. 321 (1969) ">

    U.S. Supreme Court

    MID-VALLEY PIPELINE CO. v. KING, 393 U.S. 321 (1969)

    393 U.S. 321

    MID-VALLEY PIPELINE CO. v. KING, COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE, ET AL.
    APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE.
    No. 756.
    Decided January 13, 1969.

    221 Tenn. 724, 431 S. W. 2d 277, appeal dismissed.

    H. Vincent E. Mitchell and J. Martin Regan for appellant.

    George F. McCanless, Attorney General of Tennessee, and Milton P. Rice, Deputy Attorney General, for appellees.

    PER CURIAM.

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

    MR. JUSTICE STEWART and MR. JUSTICE WHITE are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted. [393 U.S. 321, 322]  

    FindLaw Career Center

      Search for Law Jobs:

        Post a Job  |  View More Jobs
    Ads by FindLaw