Pekao Trading Corp. v. George M. Bragalini, 483 (1960)
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Number: 483
Visitors: 9
Filed: Dec. 05, 1960
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: 364 U.S. 478 81 S. Ct. 243 5 L. Ed. 2d 222 PEKAO TRADING CORP. v. George M. BRAGALINI et al. No. 483. Supreme Court of the United States December 5, 1960 Arthur C. Fink, for appellant. PER CURIAM. 1 The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. 2 Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER would note probable jurisdiction and hear the case, the more so inasmuch as the transactions which New York has taxed concerned foreign commerce, unlike those which were involved in Northwestern States Portl
Summary: 364 U.S. 478 81 S. Ct. 243 5 L. Ed. 2d 222 PEKAO TRADING CORP. v. George M. BRAGALINI et al. No. 483. Supreme Court of the United States December 5, 1960 Arthur C. Fink, for appellant. PER CURIAM. 1 The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. 2 Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER would note probable jurisdiction and hear the case, the more so inasmuch as the transactions which New York has taxed concerned foreign commerce, unlike those which were involved in Northwestern States Portla..
More
364 U.S. 478
81 S. Ct. 243
5 L. Ed. 2d 222
PEKAO TRADING CORP.
v.
George M. BRAGALINI et al.
No. 483.
Supreme Court of the United States
December 5, 1960
Arthur C. Fink, for appellant.
PER CURIAM.
1
The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
2
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER would note probable jurisdiction and hear the case, the more so inasmuch as the transactions which New York has taxed concerned foreign commerce, unlike those which were involved in Northwestern States Portland Cement Co. v. Minnesota, 358 U.S. 450, 79 S. Ct. 357, 3 L. Ed. 2d 421.
3
Mr. Justice DOUGLAS is also of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.
Source: CourtListener
