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.

Waggoner Vs. Rosenn

Waggoner vs Rosenn

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided May-05-1969
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/102344

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
394 U.S. 846
Subject
Contract

Case Summary

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

Contract

Key legal issue
Contract

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Waggoner

Respondent

Rosenn

Excerpt

waggoner v. rosenn - 394 u.s. 846 (1969) u.s. supreme court waggoner v. rosenn, 394 u.s. 846 (1969) 394 u.s. 846 waggoner et al. v. rosenn, secretary of public welfare of pennsylvania. appeal from the united states district court for the middle district of pennsylvania. no. 144, misc. decided may 5, 1969. 286 f. supp. 275, vacated and remanded. william c. sennett, attorney general of pennsylvania, and edgar r. casper, deputy attorney general, for appellee. per curiam. the motion of appellants for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. the judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the united states district court for the middle district of pennsylvania for further consideration in light of shapiro v. thompson, ante, p. 618. rhodes v. kansas, 394 u.s. 846 (1969) 394 u.s. 846 (1969) "> u.s. supreme court rhodes v. kansas, 394 u.s. 846 (1969) 394 u.s. 846 rhodes v. kansas. on petition for writ of certiorari to the district court of sedgwick county, kansas. no. 877, misc. decided may 5, 1969. certiorari granted; vacated and remanded. kent frizzell, attorney general of kansas, and e. g. collister, jr., deputy attorney 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 district court of sedgwick county, kansas, for further consideration in light of smith v. hooey, 393 u.s. 374 . page 394 u.s. 846, 847

Full Judgment

WAGGONER v. ROSENN - 394 U.S. 846 (1969)
U.S. Supreme Court WAGGONER v. ROSENN, 394 U.S. 846 (1969) 394 U.S. 846

WAGGONER ET AL. v. ROSENN, SECRETARY OF PUBLIC WELFARE OF PENNSYLVANIA.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. No. 144, Misc.
Decided May 5, 1969.

286 F. Supp. 275, vacated and remanded.

William C. Sennett, Attorney General of Pennsylvania, and Edgar R. Casper, Deputy Attorney General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The motion of appellants for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania for further consideration in light of Shapiro v. Thompson, ante, p. 618.


RHODES v. KANSAS, <a href="/102344"> 394 U.S. 846 </a> (1969) 394 U.S. 846 (1969) "> U.S. Supreme Court RHODES v. KANSAS, 394 U.S. 846 (1969) 394 U.S. 846

RHODES v. KANSAS.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE DISTRICT
COURT OF SEDGWICK COUNTY, KANSAS. No. 877, Misc.
Decided May 5, 1969.

Certiorari granted; vacated and remanded.

Kent Frizzell, Attorney General of Kansas, and E. G. Collister, Jr., Deputy Attorney 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 District Court of Sedgwick County, Kansas, for further consideration in light of Smith v. Hooey, 393 U.S. 374 .

Page 394 U.S. 846, 847



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial