ROGERS v. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, 386 U.S. 480 (1967)
Syllabus
U.S. Supreme Court Reports
ROGERS v. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, 386 U.S. 480 (1967) 386 U.S. 480ROGERS ET AL. v. CITY AND COUNTY OF
DENVER ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO.
No. 998.
Decided March 27, 1967.
___ Colo. ___, 419 P.2d 648, appeal dismissed.
Harry L. Arkin for appellants.
Max P. Zall, Charles S. Rhyne, Brice W. Rhyne and Alfred J. Tighe, Jr., for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Opinions
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO.
No. 998.
Decided March 27, 1967.
___ Colo. ___, 419 P.2d 648, appeal dismissed. Harry L. Arkin for appellants. Max P. Zall, Charles S. Rhyne, Brice W. Rhyne and Alfred J. Tighe, Jr., for appellees. PER CURIAM. The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Page 386 U.S. 480, 481
U.S. Supreme Court Reports
ROGERS v. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, 386 U.S. 480 (1967) 386 U.S. 480 (1967) 386 U.S. 480 386 U.S. 480"> ROGERS ET AL. v. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER ET AL.APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF COLORADO.
No. 998.
Decided March 27, 1967.
___ Colo. ___, 419 P.2d 648, appeal dismissed. Harry L. Arkin for appellants. Max P. Zall, Charles S. Rhyne, Brice W. Rhyne and Alfred J. Tighe, Jr., for appellees. PER CURIAM. The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. Page 386 U.S. 480, 481
Search This Case
