Supreme Court of the United States, 1934

U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Toledo

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided May 28, 1934

292 U.S. 611; 54 S. Ct. 858 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Mr. U. G. Denman for appellants in No. 982. Messrs. Ralph W. Doty and Earl F. Boxell for appellees.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Secor v. Fulton (Supreme Court of the United States 1934)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam:

The appeals herein are dismissed for the want of a substantial federal question. Fisher v. New Orleans, 218 U.S. 438, 440; Seattle & Renton Ry. v. Linhoff, 231 U.S. 568, 570; Enterprise Irrigation District v. Canal Co., 243 U.S. 157, 165, 166; Tidal Oil Co. v. Flannagan, 263 U.S. 444, 451; Hebert v. Louisiana, 272 U.S. 312, 316, 317; American Ry. Express Co. v. Ken*612tucky, 273 U.S. 269, 272, 273; Comer v. Washington, ante, p. 610. Mr. Ray Martin for appellants in Nos. 978, 979, and 980. Mr. Harold W. Fraser for appellant in No. 981.

Mr. U. G. Denman for appellants in No. 982. Messrs. Ralph W. Doty and Earl F. Boxell for appellees.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.