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.

Hall Vs. Mississippi

Hall vs Mississippi

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Nov-14-1966
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/101300

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
385 U.S. 98
Subject
Miscellaneous

Case Summary

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

Miscellaneous

Key legal issue
Miscellaneous

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Hall

Respondent

Mississippi

Excerpt

hall v. mississippi - 385 u.s. 98 (1966) u.s. supreme court hall v. mississippi, 385 u.s. 98 (1966) 385 u.s. 98 hall v. mississippi. appeal from the supreme court of mississippi. no. 672, misc. decided november 14, 1966. 187 so.2d 861, appeal dismissed. per curiam. the appeal is dismissed. the chief justice, mr. justice harlan, and mr. justice white are of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. mr. justice douglas and mr. justice fortas are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted. page 385 u.s. 98, 99

Full Judgment

HALL v. MISSISSIPPI - 385 U.S. 98 (1966)
U.S. Supreme Court HALL v. MISSISSIPPI, 385 U.S. 98 (1966) 385 U.S. 98

HALL v. MISSISSIPPI.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI.
No. 672, Misc.
Decided November 14, 1966.

187 So.2d 861, appeal dismissed.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, and MR. JUSTICE WHITE are of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS and MR. JUSTICE FORTAS are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.

Page 385 U.S. 98, 99



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial