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.

Fox Vs. North Carolina

Fox vs North Carolina

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Jun-22-1964
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/100843

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
378 U.S. 587
Subject
Contract

Case Summary

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

Contract

Key legal issue
Contract

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Fox

Respondent

North Carolina

Excerpt

fox v. north carolina - 378 u.s. 587 (1964) u.s. supreme court fox v. north carolina, 378 u.s. 587 (1964) 378 u.s. 587 fox et al. v. north carolina. on petition for writ of certiorari to the supreme court of north carolina. no. 5. decided june 22, 1964. certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded. reported below: 254 n.c. 97, 118 s. e. 2d 58. jack greenberg, james m. nabrit iii, samuel s. mitchell, george e. brown, william t. coleman, jr., louis h. pollak, charles a. reich and spottswood w. robinson iii for petitioners. t. w. bruton, attorney general of north carolina, and ralph moody, assistant attorney general, for respondent. per curiam. the petition for writ of certiorari is granted, the judgment vacated and the case remanded to the supreme court of north carolina for consideration in light of robinson v. florida, ante, p. 153. mr. justice douglas would reverse outright on the basis of the views expressed in his opinion in bell v. maryland, ante, p. 242. mr. justice black, mr. justice harlan and mr. justice white dissent. page 378 u.s. 587, 588

Full Judgment

FOX v. NORTH CAROLINA - 378 U.S. 587 (1964)
U.S. Supreme Court FOX v. NORTH CAROLINA, 378 U.S. 587 (1964) 378 U.S. 587

FOX ET AL. v. NORTH CAROLINA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA.
No. 5.
Decided June 22, 1964.

Certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded.

Reported below: 254 N.C. 97, 118 S. E. 2d 58.

Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit III, Samuel S. Mitchell, George E. Brown, William T. Coleman, Jr., Louis H. Pollak, Charles A. Reich and Spottswood W. Robinson III for petitioners.

T. W. Bruton, Attorney General of North Carolina, and Ralph Moody, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is granted, the judgment vacated and the case remanded to the Supreme Court of North Carolina for consideration in light of Robinson v. Florida, ante, p. 153.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS would reverse outright on the basis of the views expressed in his opinion in Bell v. Maryland, ante, p. 242.

MR. JUSTICE BLACK, MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE WHITE dissent.

Page 378 U.S. 587, 588



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial