Skip to content


Drueding Vs. Devlin - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number380 U.S. 125
AppellantDrueding
RespondentDevlin
Excerpt:
.....772. decided march 1, 1965. 234 f. supp. 721, affirmed. lawrence speiser, allison w. brown, jr., and edward l. genn for appellants. per curiam. the judgment is affirmed. page 380 u.s. 125, 126 city of coronado v. san diego, 380 u.s. 125 (1965) 380 u.s. 125 (1965) "> u.s. supreme court city of coronado v. san diego, 380 u.s. 125 (1965) 380 u.s. 125 city of coronado et al. v. san diego unified port district et al. appeal from the district court of appeal of california, fourth appellate district. no. 763. decided march 1, 1965. appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. reported below: 227 cal. app. 2d 455, 38 cal. rptr. 834. george a. blackstone for appellants. .....
Judgment:
DRUEDING v. DEVLIN - 380 U.S. 125 (1965)
U.S. Supreme Court DRUEDING v. DEVLIN, 380 U.S. 125 (1965) 380 U.S. 125

DRUEDING ET AL. v. DEVLIN ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND.
No. 772.
Decided March 1, 1965.

234 F. Supp. 721, affirmed.

Lawrence Speiser, Allison W. Brown, Jr., and Edward L. Genn for appellants.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed.

Page 380 U.S. 125, 126


CITY OF CORONADO v. SAN DIEGO, <a href="/101223"> 380 U.S. 125 </a> (1965) 380 U.S. 125 (1965) "> U.S. Supreme Court CITY OF CORONADO v. SAN DIEGO, 380 U.S. 125 (1965) 380 U.S. 125

CITY OF CORONADO ET AL. v. SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE
DISTRICT. No. 763.
Decided March 1, 1965.

Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Reported below: 227 Cal. App. 2d 455, 38 Cal. Rptr. 834.

George A. Blackstone for appellants.

Aaron W. Reese and Burnham Enersen for San Diego Unified Port District et al., and Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General, and Ariel C. Hilton, Deputy Attorney General, for the State of California, appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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




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