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.

Thompson Vs. Virginia

Thompson vs Virginia

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Jun-10-1963
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/100546

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. 99
Subject
Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Thompson

Respondent

Virginia

Excerpt

thompson v. virginia - 374 u.s. 99 (1963) u.s. supreme court thompson v. virginia, 374 u.s. 99 (1963) 374 u.s. 99 thompson v. virginia. on petition for writ of certiorari to the supreme court of appeals of virginia. no. 60. decided june 10, 1963. certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded. jack greenberg, constance baker motley, james m. nabrit iii, s. w. tucker and derrick a. bell, jr. for petitioner. robert y. button, attorney general of virginia, and r. d. mcilwaine iii, assistant attorney general, for respondent. per curiam. the petition for writ of certiorari is granted, the judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the supreme court of appeals of virginia for reconsideration in light of peterson v. city of greenville, 373 u.s. 244 . mr. justice harlan concurs in the result on the premises stated in his separate opinion in peterson v. city of greenville and avent v. north carolina, 373 u.s., at 248. page 374 u.s. 99, 100

Full Judgment

THOMPSON v. VIRGINIA - 374 U.S. 99 (1963)
U.S. Supreme Court THOMPSON v. VIRGINIA, 374 U.S. 99 (1963) 374 U.S. 99

THOMPSON v. VIRGINIA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF
VIRGINIA. No. 60.
Decided June 10, 1963.

Certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded.

Jack Greenberg, Constance Baker Motley, James M. Nabrit III, S. W. Tucker and Derrick A. Bell, Jr. for petitioner.

Robert Y. Button, Attorney General of Virginia, and R. D. McIlwaine III, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is granted, the judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia for reconsideration in light of Peterson v. City of Greenville, 373 U.S. 244 .

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN concurs in the result on the premises stated in his separate opinion in Peterson v. City of Greenville and Avent v. North Carolina, 373 U.S., at 248.

Page 374 U.S. 99, 100



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial