Narrative Opinion Summary
The appeal is dismissed on two grounds: first, the absence of a properly presented federal question, referencing cases such as Dewey v. Des Moines, Keokuk Hamilton Bridge Co. v. Illinois, New York v. Kleinert, and Whitney v. California; second, the lack of a substantial federal question, citing Sunday Lake Iron Co. v. Wakefield, Chicago Great Western Ry. v. Kendall, and Southern Ry. Co. v. Watts. Legal representation includes Mr. James G. Martin for the appellant and Mr. Harry W. Hart for the appellees.
Legal Issues Addressed
Dismissal of Appeal for Lack of Properly Presented Federal Questionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The case was dismissed because the appellant failed to properly present a federal question, which is a requirement for the court to have jurisdiction.
Reasoning: The appeal is dismissed on two grounds: first, the absence of a properly presented federal question, referencing cases such as Dewey v. Des Moines, Keokuk Hamilton Bridge Co. v. Illinois, New York v. Kleinert, and Whitney v. California;
Dismissal of Appeal for Lack of Substantial Federal Questionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court found that the federal question presented was not substantial enough to warrant consideration, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Reasoning: second, the lack of a substantial federal question, citing Sunday Lake Iron Co. v. Wakefield, Chicago Great Western Ry. v. Kendall, and Southern Ry. Co. v. Watts.