STADLER v. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF CALIFORNIA, 380 U.S. 252 (1965)
Syllabus
U.S. Supreme Court
STADLER v. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF CALIFORNIA, 380 U.S. 252 (1965) 380 U.S. 252STADLER ET AL., EXECUTORS v. STATE
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF CALIFORNIA.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND
APPELLATE
DISTRICT. No. 797.
Decided March 8, 1965.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Reported below. 227 Cal. App. 2d 314, 38 Cal. Rptr. 587.
Theodore W. Russell and R. Y. Schureman for appellants.
Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, Dan Kaufman, Assistant Attorney General, and Neal J. Gobar, Deputy Attorney General, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Opinions
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE
DISTRICT. No. 797.
Decided March 8, 1965.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Reported below. 227 Cal. App. 2d 314, 38 Cal. Rptr. 587. Theodore W. Russell and R. Y. Schureman for appellants. Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, Dan Kaufman, Assistant Attorney General, and Neal J. Gobar, Deputy Attorney General, for appellee. PER CURIAM. The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Page 380 U.S. 252, 253
U.S. Supreme Court
STADLER v. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF CALIFORNIA, 380 U.S. 252 (1965) 380 U.S. 252 STADLER ET AL., EXECUTORS v. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF CALIFORNIA.APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE
DISTRICT. No. 797.
Decided March 8, 1965.
Appeal dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Reported below. 227 Cal. App. 2d 314, 38 Cal. Rptr. 587. Theodore W. Russell and R. Y. Schureman for appellants. Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, Dan Kaufman, Assistant Attorney General, and Neal J. Gobar, Deputy Attorney General, for appellee. PER CURIAM. The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Page 380 U.S. 252, 253
Search This Case
