Court Opinion

ID: 8147654
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-09 20:26:47.948327+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:39:34.704542
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. King, 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. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was allowed as a petition for certiorari, as required by § 237 (c) of the Judicial Code, as amended by the Act of February 13, *6921925 (43 Stat. 936, 938), certiorari is denied.
Mr. L. G. Southard for appellants. Messrs. John M. Daniel, Attorney General of South Carolina, Cordie Page and J. Ivey Humphrey, Assistant Attorneys General, William C. Wolfe, Mendel L. Smith, R. E. Whiting, and C. C. Wyche on the brief for appellees.