Montgomery Vs. Burns

Montgomery vs Burns

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided May-05-1969

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/102346

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/102346
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: May-05-1969
Case Number: 394 U.S. 848
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Montgomery

Respondent

Burns

Excerpt

montgomery v. burns - 394 u.s. 848 (1969) u.s. supreme court montgomery v. burns, 394 u.s. 848 (1969) 394 u.s. 848 montgomery, director, california department of social welfare, et al. v. burns et al. appeal from the united states district court for the northern district of california. no. 438. decided may 5, 1969. affirmed. thomas c. lynch, attorney general of california, and elizabeth palmer and donald b. day, deputy attorneys general, for appellants. per curiam. the motion of appellees for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. the motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed. mr. justice black dissents for the reasons given in the dissenting opinion of the chief justice in shapiro v. thompson, ante, p. 644. mr. justice harlan dissents for the reasons given in his dissenting opinion in shapiro v. thompson, ante, p. 655. page 394 u.s. 848, 849

Full Judgment

MONTGOMERY v. BURNS - 394 U.S. 848 (1969)
U.S. Supreme Court MONTGOMERY v. BURNS, 394 U.S. 848 (1969) 394 U.S. 848

MONTGOMERY, DIRECTOR, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE, ET AL.
v. BURNS ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. No. 438.
Decided May 5, 1969.

Affirmed.

Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, and Elizabeth Palmer and Donald B. Day, Deputy Attorneys General, for appellants.

PER CURIAM.

The motion of appellees for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE BLACK dissents for the reasons given in the dissenting opinion of THE CHIEF JUSTICE in Shapiro v. Thompson, ante, p. 644.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN dissents for the reasons given in his dissenting opinion in Shapiro v. Thompson, ante, p. 655.

Page 394 U.S. 848, 849

Same Parties Montgomery vs Burns Same Subject Criminal