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.

Rockefeller Vs. Orans

Rockefeller vs Orans

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Oct-11-1965
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/101084

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. 10
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

Rockefeller

Respondent

Orans

Excerpt

rockefeller v. orans - 382 u.s. 10 (1965) u.s. supreme court rockefeller v. orans, 382 u.s. 10 (1965) 382 u.s. 10 rockefeller, governor of new york, et al. v. orans et al. appeal from the court of appeals of new york. no. 319. decided october 11, 1965. 15 n. y. 2d 339, 206 n. e. 2d 854, appeal dismissed. louis j. lefkowitz, attorney general of new york, thomas e. dewey, leonard joseph and malcolm h. bell for appellants. justin n. feldman for appellee orans. per curiam. on april 14, 1965, the new york court of appeals ruled that the new york laws of 1964, cc. 976, 977, 978, 979, 981, were invalid under the new york constitution, art. iii, 2. on july 13, 1965, the united states district court for the southern district of new york enjoined interference with an election of members of the new york legislature to be held on november 2, 1965, based on "the scheme set forth" in the new york laws of 1964, c. 976. insofar as the decision of the court of appeals has been superseded by the order of the district court, the appeal is dismissed. in all other respects, the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. mr. justice fortas took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. [for concurring opinion of mr. justice harlan, see no. 85, wmca, inc., et al. v. lomenzo, secretary of state of new york, et al., ante, p. 4.] page 382 u.s. 10, 11

Full Judgment

ROCKEFELLER v. ORANS - 382 U.S. 10 (1965)
U.S. Supreme Court ROCKEFELLER v. ORANS, 382 U.S. 10 (1965) 382 U.S. 10

ROCKEFELLER, GOVERNOR OF NEW YORK, ET AL. v. ORANS ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
No. 319.
Decided October 11, 1965.

15 N. Y. 2d 339, 206 N. E. 2d 854, appeal dismissed.

Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, Thomas E. Dewey, Leonard Joseph and Malcolm H. Bell for appellants.

Justin N. Feldman for appellee Orans.

PER CURIAM.

On April 14, 1965, the New York Court of Appeals ruled that the New York Laws of 1964, cc. 976, 977, 978, 979, 981, were invalid under the New York Constitution, Art. III, 2. On July 13, 1965, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York enjoined interference with an election of members of the New York Legislature to be held on November 2, 1965, based on "the scheme set forth" in the New York Laws of 1964, c. 976. Insofar as the decision of the Court of Appeals has been superseded by the order of the District Court, the appeal is dismissed. In all other respects, the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

MR. JUSTICE FORTAS took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

[For concurring opinion of MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, see No. 85, WMCA, Inc., et al. v. Lomenzo, Secretary of State of New York, et al., ante, p. 4.]

Page 382 U.S. 10, 11



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial