33:T500,{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"Legislation","name":"Sears v. Inhabitants of Nahant, 39 S. Ct. 133","datePublished":"1918-12-23","legislationDate":"1918-12-23","citation":"Sears v. Inhabitants of Nahant, 39 S. Ct. 133 (1918)","countryOfOrigin":"USA","jurisdiction":"Supreme Court of the United States","description":"Read the full text of Sears v. Inhabitants of Nahant (Sears v. Inhabitants of Nahant, 39 S. Ct. 133 (1918)). This legal opinion, filed in 1918-12-23, from the Supreme Court of the United States discusses important legal matters. Access this case and related legal documents on Midpage, an AI-powered legal research platform.","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://app.midpage.ai/document/sears-v-inhabitants-of-nahant-8143537"},"author":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Midpage"},"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Midpage"},"url":"https://app.midpage.ai/document/sears-v-inhabitants-of-nahant-8143537","isPartOf":{"@type":"WebSite","name":"Midpage","url":"https://app.midpage.ai"},"inLanguage":"en","keywords":"legal, opinion, document, research, midpage, Sears v. Inhabitants of Nahant, Supreme Court of the United States, Sears v. Inhabitants of Nahant, 39 S. Ct. 133 (1918)","isAccessibleForFree":true,"isFamilyFriendly":true}35:T4bd, Per Curiam.

Dismissed *543for want of jurisdiction upon the authority of (1) McCain v. Des Moines, 174 U. S. 168, 181; Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Ann Arbor R. R. Co., 178 U. S. 239, 243; Hull v. Burr, 234 U. S. 712, 720; Norton v. Whiteside, 239 U. S. 144, 147. (2) Farrell v. O’Brien, 199 U. S. 89, 100; Empire State-Idaho Mining Co. v. Hanley, 205 U. S. 225, 232; Goodrich v. Ferris, 214 U. S. 71, 79; Brolan v. United States, 236 U. S. 216. (3) Consolidated Turnpike Co. v. Norfolk &c. Ry. Co., 228 U. S. 596, 599; Cuyahoga River Power Co. v. Northern Realty Co., 244 U. S. 300, 304; Bilby v. Stewart, 246 U. S. 255, 257.

Mr. Burton E. Eames for plaintiff in error. Mr. Robert G. Dodge, with whom Mr. Arthur D. Hill and Mr. Richard H. Wiswall were on the brief, for defendant in. error.