INDIANA POWER COMPANY, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
ST. JOSEPH AND ELKHART POWER COMPANY

U.S. | 1902-10-20
No. 394
187 U.S. 636 Supreme Court of the United States (1902) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction, on the authority of Pim v. St. Louis, 165 U. S. 273; Cook County v. Dock Company, 138 U. S. 635; Dewey v. Des Moines, 173 U. S. 193, 200; Mining Company v. McFadden, 180 U. S. 535.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Cloverleaf Butter Co. v. Patterson, 315 U.S. 148 (U.S. 1942)
    …in in original packages or otherwise.” Cf. 26 Stat. 313; In re Rahrer, 140 U. S. 545; Schollenberger v. Pennsylvania, 171 U. S. 1; Collins v. New Hampshire, 171 U. S. 30; State v. Collins, 70 N. H. 218, 45 A. 1080, aff. by an equally divided court, 187 U. S. 636; Plumley v. Massachusetts, 155 U. S. 461. Cf. In re Kollock, 165 U. S. 526; Plumley v. Massachusetts, 155 U. S. 461, 466. These were based on the earlier act of 1886, 24 Stat. 209, which did not carry the inspection and condemnation provisions now…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw