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.

Ratley Vs. Crouse

Ratley vs Crouse

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Oct-25-1965
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/101069

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
382 U.S. 42
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ratley

Respondent

Crouse

Excerpt

ratley v. crouse - 382 u.s. 42 (1965) u.s. supreme court ratley v. crouse, 382 u.s. 42 (1965) 382 u.s. 42 ratley v. crouse, warden. appeal from the supreme court of kansas. no. 551, misc. decided october 25, 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. 42, 43 burnette v. davis, 382 u.s. 42 (1965) 382 u.s. 42 (1965) "> u.s. supreme court burnette v. davis, 382 u.s. 42 (1965) 382 u.s. 42 burnette et al. v. davis et al. appeal from the united states district court for the eastern district of virginia. no. 241. decided october 25, 1965. * [ footnote * ] together with no. 424, thornton et al. v. davis et al., also on appeal from the same court. 245 f. supp. 241, affirmed. aubrey r. bowles, jr., and aubrey r. bowles iii for appellants in no. 241. samuel w. tucker and henry l. marsh iii for appellants in no. 424. robert y. button, attorney general of virginia, r. d. mcilwaine iii, assistant attorney general, david j. mays and henry t. wickham for appellees. per curiam. the motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed. mr. justice fortas took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.

Full Judgment

RATLEY v. CROUSE - 382 U.S. 42 (1965)
U.S. Supreme Court RATLEY v. CROUSE, 382 U.S. 42 (1965) 382 U.S. 42

RATLEY v. CROUSE, WARDEN.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF KANSAS.
No. 551, Misc.
Decided October 25, 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. 42, 43


BURNETTE v. DAVIS, <a href="/101069"> 382 U.S. 42 </a> (1965) 382 U.S. 42 (1965) "> U.S. Supreme Court BURNETTE v. DAVIS, 382 U.S. 42 (1965) 382 U.S. 42

BURNETTE ET AL. v. DAVIS ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF
VIRGINIA. No. 241.
Decided October 25, 1965. *

[ Footnote * ] Together with No. 424, Thornton et al. v. Davis et al., also on appeal from the same court.

245 F. Supp. 241, affirmed.

Aubrey R. Bowles, Jr., and Aubrey R. Bowles III for appellants in No. 241. Samuel W. Tucker and Henry L. Marsh III for appellants in No. 424.

Robert Y. Button, Attorney General of Virginia, R. D. McIlwaine III, Assistant Attorney General, David J. Mays and Henry T. Wickham for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE FORTAS took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial