Court Opinion

ID: 8148747
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-09 20:28:41.919968+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:39:34.983269
License: Public Domain

Per Curiam:

The appeal herein is dismissed for the reason that the decree of the state court sought here to be reviewed was based on non-federal grounds adequate to support it (Parson Son *593& Co. v. Bird, 248 U. S. 268; Browne v. Union Pacific R. Co., 267 U. S. 255; Live Oak Water Users’ Assn. v. Railroad Commission, 269 U. S. 354, 359; Security National Bank v. Twinde, 278 U. S. 659; Garysburg Mfg. Co. v. Board of Commissioners, 280 U. S. 520); and for the want of a substantial federal question (Wabash Ry. Co. v. Flannigan, 192 U. S. 29; Erie R. Co. v. Solomon, 237 U. S. 427; 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. S. J. Brooks, with whom Mr. W. L. Matthews was on the brief, for appellants.
Messrs. J. Q. Henry, pro hac vice, by leave of Court, and John A. Mobley, with whom Mr. W. L. Cook was on the brief, for appellees.