Skip to content


Senfour Investment Co., Inc. Vs. King County - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number385 U.S. 1
AppellantSenfour Investment Co., Inc.
RespondentKing County
Excerpt:
senfour investment co., inc. v. king county - 385 u.s. 1 (1966) u.s. supreme court senfour investment co., inc. v. king county, 385 u.s. 1 (1966) 385 u.s. 1 senfour investment co., inc. v. king county. appeal from the supreme court of washington. no. 93. decided october 10, 1966. 66 wash. 2d 644, 404 p.2d 760, appeal dismissed and certiorari denied. jerome m. johnson for appellant. james e. kennedy and william l. paul, jr., for appellee. solicitor general marshall and philip a. loomis, jr., for the united states, as amicus curiae. per curiam. the motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari,.....
Judgment:
SENFOUR INVESTMENT CO., INC. v. KING COUNTY - 385 U.S. 1 (1966)
U.S. Supreme Court SENFOUR INVESTMENT CO., INC. v. KING COUNTY, 385 U.S. 1 (1966) 385 U.S. 1

SENFOUR INVESTMENT CO., INC. v. KING COUNTY.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF WASHINGTON.
No. 93.
Decided October 10, 1966.

66 Wash. 2d 644, 404 P.2d 760, appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Jerome M. Johnson for appellant.

James E. Kennedy and William L. Paul, Jr., for appellee.

Solicitor General Marshall and Philip A. Loomis, Jr., for the United States, as amicus curiae.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.

Page 385 U.S. 1, 2




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