Court Opinion

ID: 8147659
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-09 20:26:48.381084+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:39:34.706661
License: Public Domain

Per Curiam:

The appeal herein is dismissed for the want of a substantial federal question. Wabash R. R. Co. v. Flannigan, 192 U. S. 29; Erie R. R. Co. v. Solomon, 237 U. S. 427; Zucht v. *694King, 260 U. S. 174; Sugarman v. United States, 249 U. S. 182; C. A. King & Co. v. Horton, 276 U. S. 600; Bank of Indianola v. Miller, 276 U. S. 605; Roe v. Kansas, 278 U. S. 191.
Mr. Robert Benson Evins for appellant. Messrs. Charlie C. McCall, Attorney General of Alabama, Richard T. Rives, Special Assistant Attorney General, and Lawrence H. Lee on the- brief for appellees.