Narrative Opinion Summary
The appeal is dismissed due to the absence of a substantial federal question as outlined in Section 237(a) of the Judicial Code, amended by the Act of February 13, 1925. Relevant case law is referenced, including Wabash R. Co. v. Flannigan, Erie R. Co. v. Solomon, C. A. King Co. v. Horton, Bank of Indianola v. Miller, and Roe v. Kansas. The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied. Legal representation for the appellant includes Wm. H. Arnold, Wm. H. Arnold, Jr., and David C. Arnold, while Mr. Benjamin E. Carter represents the appellees.
Legal Issues Addressed
Denial of Petition for Writ of Certiorarisubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court denied the petition for a writ of certiorari, indicating that the case did not meet the criteria for higher court review.
Reasoning: The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Dismissal Due to Absence of Substantial Federal Questionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appeal was dismissed as it did not present a substantial question under federal law, thereby lacking the jurisdictional basis required for review.
Reasoning: The appeal is dismissed due to the absence of a substantial federal question as outlined in Section 237(a) of the Judicial Code, amended by the Act of February 13, 1925.