NEW YORK MOBILE HOMES ASSN. v. STECKEL, 369 U.S. 150 (1962)
Syllabus
U.S. Supreme Court
NEW YORK MOBILE HOMES ASSN. v. STECKEL, 369 U.S. 150 (1962) 369 U.S. 150NEW YORK MOBILE HOMES ASSN. ET AL. v.
STECKEL, SUPERVISOR OF THE TOWN OF
CHILI, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK. No. 609.
Decided March 19, 1962.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below: 9 N.Y.2d 533, 175 N.E.2d 151.
William L. Clay for appellants.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, Paxton Blair, Solicitor General, and Ruth Kessler Toch, Assistant Solicitor General, for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
MR. JUSTICE WHITTAKER took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Opinions
CHILI, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK. No. 609.
Decided March 19, 1962.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Reported below: 9 N.Y.2d 533, 175 N.E.2d 151. William L. Clay for appellants. Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, Paxton Blair, Solicitor General, and Ruth Kessler Toch, Assistant Solicitor General, for appellees. PER CURIAM. The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. MR. JUSTICE WHITTAKER took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. Page 369 U.S. 150, 151
U.S. Supreme Court
NEW YORK MOBILE HOMES ASSN. v. STECKEL, 369 U.S. 150 (1962) 369 U.S. 150 NEW YORK MOBILE HOMES ASSN. ET AL. v. STECKEL, SUPERVISOR OF THE TOWN OFCHILI, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK. No. 609.
Decided March 19, 1962.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Reported below: 9 N.Y.2d 533, 175 N.E.2d 151. William L. Clay for appellants. Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, Paxton Blair, Solicitor General, and Ruth Kessler Toch, Assistant Solicitor General, for appellees. PER CURIAM. The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. MR. JUSTICE WHITTAKER took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. Page 369 U.S. 150, 151
Search This Case
