Skip to content


Errington Vs. Missouri - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number371 U.S. 3
AppellantErrington
RespondentMissouri
Excerpt:
..... appeal from the supreme court of missouri. no. 157. decided october 8, 1962. appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. reported below: 355 s. w. 2d 952. walter a. raymond and kenneth c. west for appellant. per curiam. 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. page 371 u.s. 3, 4 ragan v. city of seattle, 371 u.s. 3 (1962) 371 u.s. 3 (1962) "> u.s. supreme court ragan v. city of seattle, 371 u.s. 3 (1962) 371 u.s. 3 ragan v. city of seattle et al. appeal from the supreme court of washington. no. 121. decided october 8, 1962. appeal dismissed for want.....
Judgment:
ERRINGTON v. MISSOURI - 371 U.S. 3 (1962)
U.S. Supreme Court ERRINGTON v. MISSOURI, 371 U.S. 3 (1962) 371 U.S. 3

ERRINGTON v. MISSOURI.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI.
No. 157.
Decided October 8, 1962.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 355 S. W. 2d 952.

Walter A. Raymond and Kenneth C. West for appellant.

PER CURIAM.

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.

Page 371 U.S. 3, 4


RAGAN v. CITY OF SEATTLE, <a href="/100257"> 371 U.S. 3 </a> (1962) 371 U.S. 3 (1962) "> U.S. Supreme Court RAGAN v. CITY OF SEATTLE, 371 U.S. 3 (1962) 371 U.S. 3

RAGAN v. CITY OF SEATTLE ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF WASHINGTON.
No. 121.
Decided October 8, 1962.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 58 Wash. 2d 779, 364 P.2d 916.

Francis Hoague for appellant.

A. C. Van Soelen for City of Seattle, appellee.

J. Duane Vance and William S. Howard, Jr. for Washington Music Merchants, Inc., intervening appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The motions to dismiss are 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.




Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //