Supreme Court of the United States, 1926

Peacock v. Reinecke

Peacock v. Reinecke
Supreme Court of the United States · Decided April 26, 1926 · No. 266
271 U.S. 643; 46 S. Ct. 481 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Mr. Herbert Pope, with whom Messrs. James F. Forstall and E. Barrett Prettyman were on the brief, for appellant. Solicitor General Mitchell, with whom Assistant Attorney General Willebrandt and Mr. Sewall Key were on the brief, for appellee.

Peacock v. Reinecke

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

Dismissed for want, of jurisdiction upon the authority of Farrell v. O’Brien, 199 U. S. 89, 100; Goodrich v. Ferris, 214 U. S. 71, 79; Toop v. Ulysses Land Company, 237 U. S. 580, 583; United Security Company v. American Fruit Produce Company, 238 U. S. 140, 142; Sugarman v, United States, 249 U. S. 182, 184; Berkman v. United States, 250 U. S. 114, 118; Piedmont Power & Light Com*644pany v. Town of Graham, 263 U. S. 193, 195.

Mr. Herbert Pope, with whom Messrs. James F. Forstall and E. Barrett Prettyman were on the brief, for appellant. Solicitor General Mitchell, with whom Assistant Attorney General Willebrandt and Mr. Sewall Key were on the brief, for appellee.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.