Chronicle & Gazette Publ'g Co. v. Attorney Gen., 329 U.S. 690 (1947). · Go Syfert
Chronicle & Gazette Publ'g Co. v. Attorney Gen., 329 U.S. 690 (1947). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
16 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 8 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Ashton v. Ashton (dc, 1955-11-04)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Ashton v. Ashton
D.C. · 1955 · signal: see · confidence high
See French v. Lanham, 61 App.D.C. 56 , 57 F.2d 422 . 6 . 1950 U.S.Code Cong.Service, p. 2866. 7 .See Kindleberger v. Lincoln National Bank of Washington, 81 U.S.App.D.C. 101, 106 , 155 F.2d 281, 280 , 167 A.L.R. 1011, 1018 , certiorari denied 329 U.S. 803 , 67 S.Ct. 495 , 91 L.Ed. 686 , where, dealing with the question of a beneficiary under a life insurance policy, it was said: “Buckley survived until 1943, some nine years after the statute was adopted.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Patrocinia L. Vda De Rodulfa v. United States of America and Administrator of Veterans Affairs, Juliana Caparas Vda Del Rosario v. United States of America and Donald E. Johnson, Administrator of Veterans Affairs
D.C. Cir. · 1972 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Vito v. Vito, 106 U.S.App.D.C. 326, 328 , 272 F.2d 555, 557 (1959) 35 Kindleberger v. Lincoln Nat'l Bank, 81 U.S.App.D.C. 101, 106 , 155 F.2d 281, 286 (1946), cert. denied, 329 U.S. 803 , 67 S. Ct. 495 , 91 L.Ed. 686 (1947).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Chronicle & Gazette Publishing Co., Inc.
v.
Attorney General of New Hampshire
No. 780.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 6, 1947.
329 U.S. 690
Stanley M. Burns and Elisha Hanson for appellant., Robert W. Upton for appellees.
Published
Per Curiam:

The motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is dismissed for the want of a substantial federal question. (1) Nebbia v. New York, 291 U. S. 502; Olsen v. Nebraska, 313 U. S. 236. (2) Associated Press v. Labor Board, 301 U. S. 103; Associated Press v. United States, 326 U. S. 1. Mr. Justice Douglas, Mr. Justice Murphy, and Mr. Justice Rutledge are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.