Gills Vs. California

Gills vs California

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Jun-05-1967

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/101645

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/101645
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: Jun-05-1967
Case Number: 387 U.S. 574
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

Gills

Respondent

California

Excerpt

gills v. california - 387 u.s. 574 (1967) u.s. supreme court gills v. california, 387 u.s. 574 (1967) 387 u.s. 574 gills v. california. on petition for writ of certiorari to the supreme court of california. no. 1043, misc. decided june 5, 1967. certiorari granted; vacated and remanded. petitioner pro se. thomas c. lynch, attorney general of california, and edsel w. haws and daniel j. kremer, deputy attorneys general, for respondent. per curiam. the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. the judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the court of appeal of california, third appellate district, for further consideration in light of chapman v. california, 386 u.s. 18 . page 387 u.s. 574, 575

Full Judgment

GILLS v. CALIFORNIA - 387 U.S. 574 (1967)
U.S. Supreme Court GILLS v. CALIFORNIA, 387 U.S. 574 (1967) 387 U.S. 574

GILLS v. CALIFORNIA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA.
No. 1043, Misc.
Decided June 5, 1967.

Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded.

Petitioner pro se.

Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, and Edsel W. Haws and Daniel J. Kremer, Deputy Attorneys General, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the Court of Appeal of California, Third Appellate District, for further consideration in light of Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 .

Page 387 U.S. 574, 575

Same Parties Gills vs California Same Subject Land Acquisition