MEMORANDA

OF

CASES DISPOSED OF WITHOUT OPINIONS.

ALABAMA POWER COMPANY et al., Plain | JOHN SIMMONS COMPANY, Petitioner, v.

tiffs in Error, v. BANKS S. TALMADGE, as Administrator, etc. [No. 741.] Error to state court-frivolous Federal question.

GRIER BROTHERS COMPANY. [No. 57.]
Motion to modify decree.

Mr. James Q. Rice for petitioner.
Messrs. David A. Reed, C. P. Byrnes,

In Error to the Supreme Court of the George H. Parmelee, and George E. State of Alabama.

Messrs. William L. Martin and Perry
W. Turner for plaintiffs in error.
Messrs. E. W. Pettus and Ogden
Persons for defendant in error.
May 15, 1922. Per Curiam:

Dis

Stebbins for respondent.

May 29, 1922. Denied.

missed for the want of jurisdiction on SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, Appelauthorities cited.

UNITED SHOE MACHINERY CORPORATION et al., Appellants, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. [No. 119.]

Messrs. Frederick P. Fish, Charles F. Choate, Jr., and C. A, Severence for appellants.

Solicitor General Beck, Mr. LaRue Brown, and Elias Field for appellee.

lant, v. A. D. WATTS et al., etc., et al. [No. 927]; ATLANTIC & YADKIN RAILWAY COMPANY, Appellant, v. A. D. WATTS et al., etc., et al. [No. 928]. Appeals from the District Court of the United States for the Western District of North Carolina. SEABOARD AIR LINE RAILWAY COMPANY, Appellant, v. A. D. WATTS et al., etc., et al. [No. 960]; ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant, v. A. D. WATTS et al., etc., et al. [No. 961]; and NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant, v. A. D. WATTS et al., etc., et al. [No. 962]. Appeals from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of North Carolina.

Messrs. W. B. Rodman, W. B. Rodman, Jr., and John M. Robinson for appellant. Mssrs. William P. Bynum and James S. Manning for appellees.

May 29, 1922. Order: The United Shoe Machinery Corporation and others, appellants, having presented their application for rehearing and modification of the decree of affirmance heretofore rendered in this cause, upon consideration thereof, the same is overruled. It is ordered that the district court, after the receipt of the mandate of affirmance, may hear an application of May 29, 1922. Per Curiam: In these the appellants for an extension of time cases, which were suits brought under in which to readjust the business of the 8 266, Judicial Code, as amended by the United Shoe Machinery Corporation Act of March 4, 1913 (37 Stat. at L. with its lessees, and, if satisfied that 1013, chap. 160, Comp. Stat. § 1243, 5 the same is necessary, may grant a time, not exceeding three months from the date of the receipt of the mandate, in which the United Shoe Machinery Corporation may adjust its business with lessees in a manner to comply with the decree of this court, affirming [576] the decree of the district court.

Fed. Stat. Anno. 2d ed. p. 984), for a preliminary and permanent injunction, a preliminary injunction was denied by the district court, and a stay granted until an application could be made to this court. As the district court is [577] familiar with the character of the case, and we are not, we deny the

motion for a stay, with leave to apply | to the district court for a stay until the matter can be disposed of here, if, in its judgment, it deem that such a stay should be granted. The motion to advance is granted, and the cases set for hearing on the first Monday in Novem

ber.

DORA E. ROOKER et al., Petitioners, V.
FIDELITY TRUST COMPANY et al., etc.
[No. 634]; and DORA E. ROOKER et al.,
Plaintiffs in Error, v. FIDELITY TRUST
COMPANY et al., etc. [No. 785].

Motion for a rule to show cause; petition for supplemental writ of error; and petition for supplemental writ of certiorari in this case.

See same case below, N. E. 769.

Ind. 131

Mr. William V. Rooker for petition

[578] BUELL V. STEVENS, Plaintiff in
Error, v. SOUTHERN PACIFIC LAND
E.
COMPANY [No. 401]; RALPH
STEVENS, Administrator, etc., Plain-
tiff in Error, v. SOUTHERN PACIFIC
LAND COMPANY [No. 402]; and MARY
V. BEGGS, Plaintiff in Error v. SOUTH-
ERN PACIFIC LAND COMPANY
403].
Error to state court-Federal question.
In Error to the District Court of Ap-
peal, Second Appellate District, Division
Two, of the State of California.

See same case below, No. 401,
App. 195 Pac. 712; No. 402,
App. —,
195 Pac. 714; No. 403,

,

App. 195 Pac. 714.

--

[No.

Cal.

Cal.

Cal.

Messrs. Daniel W. Clark and William

L. Chitty for plaintiff in error.

June 5, 1922. Per Curiam: Dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. Section 237 of the Judicial Code, as amended by the Act of September 6, 1916 (39 Stat. at L. 726, chap. 448, § 2, Comp. Stat. § 1214, Fed. Stat. Anno. Supp. 1918, p. 411); Baltimore & P. R. Co. v. Hopkins, 130 U. S. 210, 32 L. ed. 908, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 503; Jett Bros. Distilling Co. v. Carrollton, 252 U. S. 1, 6, 64 L. ed. 421, 423, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 255; Schaff v. J. C. Famechon Co. decided Feb. 27, 1922 [258 U. S. 76, ante, 472, 42 Sup. Ct. Rep. 189].

WILLIAM R. WARNER & COMPANY, Petitioner, v. ELI LILLY & COMPANY. [No. 857.]

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

See same case below, 275 Fed. 752.
W. Wickersham,
Messrs. George
Francis Rawle, and Rober S. Baldwin
for petitioner.

Mr. E. W. Bradford for respondent.
May 15, 1922. Granted.

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of the State of New York.

See same case below, 198 App. Div. 966, 189 N. Y. Supp. 946, on reargument, 199 App. Div. 957, 191 N. Y. Supp. 933. Mr. Lyman M. Bass for petitioner. Messrs. Israel G. Hollender and Clark H. Hammond for respondent. May 15, 1922. Granted.

[579] TOLEDO SCALE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. COMPUTING SCALE COMPANY. [No. 891.]

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

See same case below, 281 Fed. 488. Messrs. Horace Kent Tenney and George D. Welles for petitioner.

Messrs. John M. Zane, Drury W. Cooper, and Charles F. Morse for re

Messrs. Frank Thunen and C. F. R. spondent.
Ogilby for defendant in error.

May 29, 1922. Granted.

259 U. 8.

Messrs. George M. Napier and Jesse tioners. M. Wood for defendant in error.