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.

Mcgee Vs. Crouse

Mcgee vs Crouse

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Nov-08-1965
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/101066
CiteSignal

Log in to get a daily email when new judgments cite this order.

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
382 U.S. 67
Subject
Intellectual Property

Case Summary

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

Intellectual Property

Key legal issue
Intellectual Property

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mcgee

Respondent

Crouse

Bonus Feature

AI Brief & Ask

Your first-pass case note in minutes - an 18-section AI Brief on this judgment, plus case-scoped chat. Part of AI Studio with Verdict Lens, Devil's Bench, and DocMind.

Try free for 7 days

Credentials emailed - then log in for AI Brief on this judgment. Already have an account? · Learn more

Excerpt

mc gee v. crouse - 382 u.s. 67 (1965) u.s. supreme court mc gee v. crouse, 382 u.s. 67 (1965) 382 u.s. 67 mc gee v. crouse, warden. appeal from the supreme court of kansas. no. 550, misc. decided november 8, 1965. appeal dismissed and certiorari denied. per curiam. the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied. page 382 u.s. 67, 68 andrews van lines, inc. v. united states, 382 u.s. 67 (1965) 382 u.s. 67 (1965) "> u.s. supreme court andrews van lines, inc. v. united states, 382 u.s. 67 (1965) 382 u.s. 67 andrews van lines, inc., et al. v. united states et al. appeal from the united states district court for the district of nebraska. no. 438. decided november 8, 1965. 240 f. supp. 763, affirmed. j. max harding for appellants. solicitor general marshall, assistant attorney general turner, robert b. hummel, gerald kadish, robert w. ginnane and thomas h. ploss for the united states et al. per curiam. the motion to affirm is granted a

Full Judgment

Mc GEE v. CROUSE - 382 U.S. 67 (1965)
U.S. Supreme Court Mc GEE v. CROUSE, 382 U.S. 67 (1965) 382 U.S. 67

Mc GEE v. CROUSE, WARDEN.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS.
No. 550, Misc.
Decided November 8, 1965.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.

Page 382 U.S. 67, 68


ANDREWS VAN LINES, INC. v. UNITED STATES, <a href="/101066"> 382 U.S. 67 </a> (1965) 382 U.S. 67 (1965) "> U.S. Supreme Court ANDREWS VAN LINES, INC. v. UNITED STATES, 382 U.S. 67 (1965) 382 U.S. 67

ANDREWS VAN LINES, INC., ET AL. v. UNITED STATES ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA.
No. 438.
Decided November 8, 1965.

240 F. Supp. 763, affirmed.

J. Max Harding for appellants.

Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Robert B. Hummel, Gerald Kadish, Robert W. Ginnane and Thomas H. Ploss for the United States et al.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE STEWART is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial