Krause Vs. Rhodes

Krause vs Rhodes

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Sep-16-1977

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/104121

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/104121
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: Sep-16-1977
Case Number: 434 U.S. 1335
Subject: Miscellaneous

Case Summary

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

Miscellaneous

Key legal issue: Miscellaneous

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Krause

Respondent

Rhodes

Excerpt

.....the merits of applicants' position. see: 570 f.2d 563. mr. justice stewart, circuit. justice. this is an application for an injunction and/or a stay of mandate of the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit, pending the filing of a petition for certiorari in this court. its purpose is to secure from me, as sixth circuit justice, an order stopping for the time being the construction of a gymnasium on a site at kent state university in ohio. the claim is that only such an order will prevent the obliteration of evidence necessary to a fair retrial of a lawsuit in which the applicants are plaintiffs. similar applications are now pending in the united states district court for the northern district of ohio and in the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit. because of the intimate familiarity with the factual environment of this litigation acquired by those courts during the original trial and appeal, they are both now in a position far superior to that of an individual justice of this court fairly to assess the merits of the applicants' position. accordingly, the application is hereby denied, without page 434 u. s. 1336 prejudice to the right of the applicants to continue to pursue similar relief in the district court and/or the court of appeals, or to petition this court for certiorari. it is so ordered.

Full Judgment

Krause v. Rhodes - 434 U.S. 1335 (1977)
U.S. Supreme Court Krause v. Rhodes, 434 U.S. 1335 (1977)

Krause v. Rhodes

No. A-260

Decided September 16, 1977

434 U.S. 1335

ON APPLICATION FOR INJUNCTION AND/OR STAY

SYLLABUS

Application for an injunction and/or stay of Court of Appeals' mandate, pending the filing of a petition for certiorari, for the purpose of stopping the construction of a gymnasium at Kent State University, is denied, where similar applications are pending in the District Court and Court of Appeals, both of which are in a position far superior to that of an individual Justice fairly to assess the merits of applicants' position.

See: 570 F.2d 563.

MR. JUSTICE STEWART, Circuit. Justice.

This is an application for an injunction and/or a stay of mandate of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, pending the filing of a petition for certiorari in this Court. Its purpose is to secure from me, as Sixth Circuit Justice, an order stopping for the time being the construction of a gymnasium on a site at Kent State University in Ohio. The claim is that only such an order will prevent the obliteration of evidence necessary to a fair retrial of a lawsuit in which the applicants are plaintiffs.

Similar applications are now pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio and in the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Because of the intimate familiarity with the factual environment of this litigation acquired by those courts during the original trial and appeal, they are both now in a position far superior to that of an individual Justice of this Court fairly to assess the merits of the applicants' position.

Accordingly, the application is hereby denied, without

Page 434 U. S. 1336

prejudice to the right of the applicants to continue to pursue similar relief in the District Court and/or the Court of Appeals, or to petition this Court for certiorari.

It is so ordered.

Same Court & Year US Supreme Court · 1977 Same Parties Krause vs Rhodes Same Subject Miscellaneous