STANDARD PIPE LINE CO. v. COMMISSIONERS OF INDEX SULPHUR DRAINAGE, 278 U.S. 558 (1928)
U.S. Supreme Court
STANDARD PIPE LINE CO. v. COMMISSIONERS OF INDEX SULPHUR DRAINAGE, 278 U.S. 558 (1928)278 U.S. 558
No. 11.
STANDARD PIPE LINE COMPANY, Inc., et
al., petitioners,
v.
COMMISSIONERS OF INDEX SULPHUR DRAINAGE DISTRICT.
Supreme Court of the United States
October 15, 1928
Messrs. T. M. Milling, of Shreveport, La., and William H. Arnold, William H. Arnold, Jr., and David C. Arnold, all of Texarkana, Ark., for petitioner.
Mr. Henry Moore, Jr., of Texarkana, Ark., for respondent.
PER CURIAM.
The writ of certiorari (48 S. Ct. 420) is dismissed for the
reason that the decree of the state court sought here to be
reviewed was based on a non-Federal ground adequate to support it.
Bilby v. Stewart, 246 U.S.
255, 257, 38 S. Ct. 264; Farson, Son & Co. v. Bird,
248 U.S.
268, 271, 39 S. Ct. 111.[ Standard Pipe Line Co v. Comm. of
Index Sulphur Drainage Dist. 278 U.S. 558 (1928) ]
U.S. Supreme Court
STANDARD PIPE LINE CO. v. COMMISSIONERS OF INDEX SULPHUR DRAINAGE, 278 U.S. 558 (1928) 278 U.S. 558No. 11.
STANDARD PIPE LINE COMPANY, Inc., et al., petitioners,
v.
COMMISSIONERS OF INDEX SULPHUR DRAINAGE DISTRICT. Supreme Court of the United States October 15, 1928 Messrs. T. M. Milling, of Shreveport, La., and William H. Arnold, William H. Arnold, Jr., and David C. Arnold, all of Texarkana, Ark., for petitioner. Mr. Henry Moore, Jr., of Texarkana, Ark., for respondent. PER CURIAM. The writ of certiorari (48 S. Ct. 420) is dismissed for the reason that the decree of the state court sought here to be reviewed was based on a non-Federal ground adequate to support it. Bilby v. Stewart, 246 U.S. 255, 257, 38 S. Ct. 264; Farson, Son & Co. v. Bird, 248 U.S. 268, 271, 39 S. Ct. 111.[ Standard Pipe Line Co v. Comm. of Index Sulphur Drainage Dist. 278 U.S. 558 (1928) ]
