275 U.S. 489

275 U.S. 489

48 S.Ct. 32

275 U.S. 537

72 L.Ed. 388

STATE OF MISSOURI, ex rel. WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY, plaintiff in error,
v.
PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF MISSOURI and Union Electric Light & Power Company; STATE OF MISSOURI, ex rel. WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY, plaintiff in error, v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF MISSOURI and Union Electric Light & Power Company; STATE OF MISSOURI, ex rel. ST. LOUIS BREWING ASSOCIATION, plaintiff in error, v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF MISSOURI and Union Electric Light & Power Company; STATE OF MISSOURI, ex rel. ST. LOUIS BREWING ASSOCIATION, plaintiff in error, v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF MISSOURI and Union Electric Light & Power Company; STATE OF MISSOURI, ex rel. WAINRIGHT REAL ESTATE COMPANY, plaintiff in error, v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF MISSOURI and Union Electric Light & Power Company; STATE OF MISSOURI, ex rel. WAINRIGHT REAL ESTATE COMPANY, plaintiff in error, v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF MISSOURI and Union Electric Light & Power Company; STATE OF MISSOURI, ex rel. HOTEL STATLER COMPANY, Inc., plaintiff in error, v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF MISSOURI and Union Electric Light & Power Company.

No. 21.

No. 22.

No. 23.

No. 24.

No. 25.

No. 26.

No. 27.

Supreme Court of the United States

October 24, 1927

and

Messrs. Charles Nagel, Charles M. Polk and Marion C. Early, all of St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiffs in error.

Mr. J. P. Painter, of Jefferson City, Mo., for defendant in error Public Service Commission of Missouri.

Mr. Theodore Rassieur, of St. Louis, Mo., for defendant in error Union Electric Light & Power Co.

PER CURIAM.

1

The writs of error are dismissed on the authority of Section 237 of the Judicial Code, as amended by the act of February 13, 1925 (43 Stat. 936, 937 (28 USCA § 344; Comp. St. § 1214)), for lack of jurisdiction. Treating the writs of error as applications for certiorari, the applications are denied for want of a substantial Federal question on the authority of Shulthis v. McDougal, 225 U. S. 561, 569, 32 S. Ct. 704, 56 L. Ed. 1205; Hull v. Burr, 234 U. S. 712, 720, 34 S. Ct. 892, 58 L. Ed. 1557; Norton v. Whiteside, 239 U. S. 144, 147, 36 S. Ct. 97, 60 L. Ed. 186.

jdjungle

Share
Published by
jdjungle
Tags: 275 U.S. 489

Recent Posts

WINTERBOTTOM v. WRIGHT, 152 Eng. Rep. 402 (Ex. 1842).

WINTERBOTTOM v. WRIGHT In the Exchequer, June 6, 1842. Reported in 10 Meeson & Welsby,…

4 weeks ago

YU v. POZNIAK-RICE, Cal. App. No. B337415 (July 21, 2025)

Filed 7/21/25 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA…

5 months ago

WING INFLATABLES, INC. v. CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD’S, Cal. App. No. A173263 (July 21, 2025)

Filed 7/21/25 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA…

5 months ago

NASRALLAH v. BARR, 590 U.S. 573 (2020)

140 S.Ct. 1683 (2020)590 U.S. 573 Nidal Khalid NASRALLAH, Petitioner, v. William P. BARR, Attorney…

7 months ago

THOLE v. U.S. BANK N.A., 590 U.S. 538

140 S.Ct. 1615 (2020)590 US 538207 L. Ed. 2d 85 James J. THOLE, et al.,…

7 months ago

BANISTER v. DAVIS, 590 U.S. 504

140 S.Ct. 1698 (2020)590 U.S. 504 Gregory Dean BANISTER, Petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas…

7 months ago