US SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
CLIMATE CONTROL, INC. v. HILL, 364 U.S. 409 (1960)
Subscribe to Cases that cite INC. v. HILL, 364 U.S. 409U.S. Supreme Court
CLIMATE CONTROL, INC. v. HILL, 364 U.S. 409 (1960)
364 U.S. 409 CLIMATE CONTROL, INC., v. HILL ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA.
No. 251.
Decided November 14, 1960.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 86 Ariz. 180, 342 P.2d 854; 87 Ariz. 201, 349 P.2d 771.
William R. Meagher for appellant.
William W. Stevenson, Samuel H. Morris, Richard M. Fennemore, Daniel E. Cracchiolo, J. A. Riggins, Jr., Denison Kitchel, Francis J. Ryley, Ivan Robinette, Edward Jacobson, Howard Twitty, John R. Franks and Richard G. Kleindienst for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
U.S. Supreme Court
BOBO v. MAYOR & COUNCILMEN OF SAVANNAH BEACH, 364 U.S. 409 (1960)
364 U.S. 409 BOBO v. MAYOR & COUNCILMEN OF SAVANNAH BEACH, GEORGIA.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA.
No. 409.
Decided November 14, 1960.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 216 Ga. 12, 114 S. E. 2d 374.
Erwin A. Friedman for appellant.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
