History
  • No items yet
midpage
Wall v. McNee
296 U.S. 547
SCOTUS
1935
Check Treatment
Per Curiam:

As appellants, de*548fendants below, are not state officers within the meaning of § 266 of the Judicial Code (Spielman Motor Co. v. Dodge, 295 U. S. 89, 92; Ex parte Collins, 277 U. S. 565, 568; Ex parte Public National Bank, 278 U. S. 101, 104; School District No. 7 v. Hunnicut, 283 U. S. 810; Ex parte Everglades Drainage District, 293 U. S. 521; Everglades Drainage Dist. v. Florida Ranch & Dairy Corp., 74 F. (2d) 914, 915, 916; Rorick v. Everglades Drainage, 27 F. (2d) 377, 380, 381), the decree herein is reversed and the cause remanded to the District Court for further proceedings to be taken independently of § 266 of the Judicial Code, Gully v. Interstate Natural Gas Co., 292 U. S. 16, 18, 19.

Mr. H. E. Carter, Assistant Attorney General of Florida, with whom Mr. Cary D. Landis, Attorney General, and Mr. J. V. Keen, Assistant Attorney General, were on the brief, for appellants. Mr. D. C. Hull, with whom Messrs. Erskine W. Landis and Francis P. Whitehair were on the brief, for appellee. See 4 F. Supp. 496.

Case Details

Case Name: Wall v. McNee
Court Name: Supreme Court of the United States
Date Published: Nov 18, 1935
Citation: 296 U.S. 547
Docket Number: No. 35
Court Abbreviation: SCOTUS
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.