Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Price Vs. Moss

Price vs Moss

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Jun-10-1963
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/100550

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
374 U.S. 103
Subject
Contract

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Contract

Key legal issue
Contract

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Price

Respondent

Moss

Excerpt

price v. moss - 374 u.s. 103 (1963) u.s. supreme court price v. moss, 374 u.s. 103 (1963) 374 u.s. 103 price et al. v. moss et al. appeal from the united states district court for the western district of oklahoma. no. 688. decided june 10, 1963. * [ footnote * ] together with no. 689, oklahoma farm bureau et al. v. moss et al., on appeal from the same court. appeals dismissed because the order of the district court is not appealable under 28 u.s.c. 1253. reported below: 207 f. supp. 885. walt allen, jim a. rinehart, leon s. hirsh and james c. harkin for appellants in no. 688. frank carter for appellants in no. 689. norman e. reynolds, jr. and sid white for appellees. per curiam. the motion to dismiss is granted and the appeals are dismissed as the order of the district court is not appealable under 28 u.s.c. 1253. mr. justice black and mr. justice goldberg concur in the result. mr. justice harlan would postpone consideration of the question of jurisdiction until after argument on the merits. page 374 u.s. 103, 104

Full Judgment

PRICE v. MOSS - 374 U.S. 103 (1963)
U.S. Supreme Court PRICE v. MOSS, 374 U.S. 103 (1963) 374 U.S. 103

PRICE ET AL. v. MOSS ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF
OKLAHOMA. No. 688.
Decided June 10, 1963. *

[ Footnote * ] Together with No. 689, Oklahoma Farm Bureau et al. v. Moss et al., on appeal from the same Court.

Appeals dismissed because the order of the District Court is not appealable under 28 U.S.C. 1253.

Reported below: 207 F. Supp. 885.

Walt Allen, Jim A. Rinehart, Leon S. Hirsh and James C. Harkin for appellants in No. 688.

Frank Carter for appellants in No. 689.

Norman E. Reynolds, Jr. and Sid White for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeals are dismissed as the order of the District Court is not appealable under 28 U.S.C. 1253.

MR. JUSTICE BLACK and MR. JUSTICE GOLDBERG concur in the result.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN would postpone consideration of the question of jurisdiction until after argument on the merits.

Page 374 U.S. 103, 104



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial