Legal Opinion
Purcell v. New York Central R.
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided November 11, 1935No. 509PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Per curiam
The motion for leave to file statement as to jurisdiction is granted. The. appeal herein is dismissed for the want of a properly'presented *546federal question. Home for Incurables v. City of New York, 187 U. S. 155, 158; Henkel v. Cincinnati, 177 U. S. 170; Seaboard Air Line Ry. v. Duvall, 225 U. S. 477, 481; Fullerton v. Texas, 196 U. S. 192, 193-194; Connecticut General Life Ins. Co. v. Johnson, ante, p. 535. The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Messrs. T. J. Johnston and Irving I. Goldsmith for appellant. Mr. Charles E. Nichols for appellee.
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Seaboard Air Line Railway v. DuvallSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Home for Incurables v. City of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Fullerton v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Henkel v. CincinnatiSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
3Cited by8 opinions
- Honeyman v. HananSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Charleston Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Alderson, State Tax Com'rSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Charleston Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. AldersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Consumer Protection Board v. Public Service CommissionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
- Matter of Lefkowitz v. Pub. Serv. Comm'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.