Court Opinion

ID: 8149700
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-09 20:30:28.072864+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:39:35.239907
License: Public Domain

Per Curiam:

The appeal herein is dismissed for the want of a -substantial federal question. (1) Ex parte Poresky, ante, p. 30; Levering & Garrigues Co. v. Morrin, 289 U.S. 103, 105; Equitable Life Assurance Society v. Brown, 187 U. S. 308, 311; Pennsylvania Hospital v. Philadelphia, 245 U.S. 20, 24; Roe v. Kansas, 278 U.S. 191. (2) Patsone v. Pennsylvania, 232 U.S. 138, 144; Silver v. Silver, 280 U.S. 117, 123; Sproles v. Binford, 286 U.S. 374, 396. (3) United States v. Grimaud, 220 U.S. 506, 516, 518; United States v. Chemical Foundation, 272 U.S. 1, 11, 12; Hampton & Co. v. United States, 276 U.S. 394, 406, 407.