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.

Cummings Vs. Huiskamp

Cummings vs Huiskamp

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Nov-06-1961
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/100010

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
368 U.S. 30
Subject
Miscellaneous

Case Summary

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

Miscellaneous

Key legal issue
Miscellaneous

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Cummings

Respondent

Huiskamp

Excerpt

cummings v. huiskamp - 368 u.s. 30 (1961) u.s. supreme court cummings v. huiskamp, 368 u.s. 30 (1961) 368 u.s. 30 cummings v. huiskamp, judge, lee county district court, et al. appeal from the united states district court for the southern district of iowa. no. 511, misc. decided november 6, 1961. per curiam. the appeal is dismissed. page 368 u.s. 30, 31 department of revenue v. united states, 368 u.s. 30 (1961) 368 u.s. 30 (1961) "> u.s. supreme court department of revenue v. united states, 368 u.s. 30 (1961) 368 u.s. 30 department of revenue of illinois et al. v. united states et al. appeal from the united states district court for the northern district of illinois. no. 245. decided november 6, 1961. judgment vacated and case remanded. reported below: 191 f. supp. 723. william g. clark, attorney general of illinois, and william c. wines, raymond s. sarnow and a. zola groves, assistant attorneys general, for appellants. solicitor general cox and john h. caruthers for the united states et al. per curiam. in the light of the representations of the solicitor general and upon consideration of the entire record, the judgment of the district court is vacated. the case is remanded to the district court for further consideration in the light of developments which have occurred since the injunction was issued, without prejudice to consideration by that court of any application by appellees for such temporary equitable relief as they may request pending the further proceedings hereby ordered.

Full Judgment

CUMMINGS v. HUISKAMP - 368 U.S. 30 (1961)
U.S. Supreme Court CUMMINGS v. HUISKAMP, 368 U.S. 30 (1961) 368 U.S. 30

CUMMINGS v. HUISKAMP, JUDGE, LEE COUNTY DISTRICT COURT, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT
OF IOWA. No. 511, Misc.
Decided November 6, 1961.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed.

Page 368 U.S. 30, 31


DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE v. UNITED STATES, <a href="/100010"> 368 U.S. 30 </a> (1961) 368 U.S. 30 (1961) "> U.S. Supreme Court DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE v. UNITED STATES, 368 U.S. 30 (1961) 368 U.S. 30

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE OF ILLINOIS ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT
OF ILLINOIS. No. 245.
Decided November 6, 1961.

Judgment vacated and case remanded.

Reported below: 191 F. Supp. 723.

William G. Clark, Attorney General of Illinois, and William C. Wines, Raymond S. Sarnow and A. Zola Groves, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellants.

Solicitor General Cox and John H. Caruthers for the United States et al.

PER CURIAM.

In the light of the representations of the Solicitor General and upon consideration of the entire record, the judgment of the District Court is vacated. The case is remanded to the District Court for further consideration in the light of developments which have occurred since the injunction was issued, without prejudice to consideration by that court of any application by appellees for such temporary equitable relief as they may request pending the further proceedings hereby ordered.



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial