Ex parte Steckler

Supreme Court of the United States

Jurisdictional statement submitted May 12, 1934.

Decided May 21, 1934.

Supreme Court of the United States · decided 1934-05-21

1 counsel of record

Relies on New Orleans Water-Works Co v. Louisiana Sugar Refining Co · Cross Lake Shooting and Fishing Club v. State of Louisiana · Long Sault Development Co. v. Call

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1934-05-21

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1989

2 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Mr. Thomas Gilmore for appellants.

¶2Per Curiam:

¶3The appeal herein is dismissed for the reason that the decision of the state court sought here to be reviewed was based upon a non-federal ground adequate to support it. New Orleans Water Works Co. v. Louisiana Sugar Co., 125 U.S. 18, 38, 39; Cross Lake Club v. Louisiana, 224 U.S. 632, 639, 640; Long Sault Development Co. v. Call, 242 U.S. 272, 277, 278; Hardin-Wyandot Lighting Co. v. Upper Sandusky, 251 U.S. 173, 178, 179; Girard Trust Co. v. Ocean & Lake Realty Co., 286 U.S. 523; Real Estate-Land Title & Trust Co. v. Springfield, 287 U.S. 577.