Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

Indian Territory Illuminating Oil Co. v. Board of Equalization

287 U.S. 573

Type: Opinion
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1932-11-07
Topic: general

Per Curiam: The appeals herein are dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Section 237 (a), Judicial Code as amended by the Act of February 13, 1925 (43 Stat. 936, 937); Citizens National Bank v. Durr, 257 U. S. 99, 106, 107; Jett Bros. Distilling Co. v.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Indian Territory Illuminating Oil Co. v. Board of Equalization. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 7 opinions

Per Curiam:

The appeals herein are dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Section 237 (a), Judicial Code as amended by the Act of February 13, 1925 (43 Stat. 936, 937); Citizens National Bank v. Durr, 257 U. S. 99, 106, 107; Jett Bros. Distilling Co. v. Carrollton, 252 U. S. 1, 4, 5, 6. Treating the papers whereon the appeals in these *574 causes were allowed as petitions for writs of certiorari, § 237 (c), Judicial Code as amended (43 Stat. 936, 938), consideration thereof is postponed and leave is granted to petitioners to file briefs supporting applications for certiorari within fifteen days, with ten days for opposing counsel to reply.

Messrs. John H. Miley and Wm. P. Mc-Ginnis for appellant. Mr. Hugh Webster for the Board of Equalization of Tulsa County. Messrs. Ernest F. Jenkins and Guy L. Horton for the Board of County Commissioners of Payne County.