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.

Massachusetts Vs. White

Massachusetts vs White

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Dec-11-1978
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/104303

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
439 U.S. 280
Subject
Right to Information

Case Summary

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

Right to Information

Key legal issue
Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Massachusetts

Respondent

White

Excerpt

massachusetts v. white - 439 u.s. 280 (1978) u.s. supreme court massachusetts v. white, 439 u.s. 280 (1978) 439 u.s. 280 massachusetts v. white certiorari to the supreme judicial court of massachusetts no. 77-1388. argued november 28, 1978 decided december 11, 1978 ___ mass. ___, 371 n. e. 2d 777, affirmed by an equally divided court barbara a. h. smith, assistant attorney general of massachusetts, argued the cause for petitioner. with her on the briefs were francis x. bellotti, attorney general, and stephen r. delinsky, assistant attorney general. robert s. cohen argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent. * [ footnote * ] fred e. inbau, wayne w. schmidt, robert smith, and james p. costello filed a brief for americans for effective law enforcement, inc., as amicus curiae urging reversal. per curiam. the judgment is affirmed by an equally divided court. mr. justice powell took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. page 439 u.s. 280, 281

Full Judgment

MASSACHUSETTS v. WHITE - 439 U.S. 280 (1978)
U.S. Supreme Court MASSACHUSETTS v. WHITE, 439 U.S. 280 (1978) 439 U.S. 280

MASSACHUSETTS v. WHITE
CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS

No. 77-1388.

Argued November 28, 1978
Decided December 11, 1978

___ Mass. ___, 371 N. E. 2d 777, affirmed by an equally divided Court

Barbara A. H. Smith, Assistant Attorney General of Massachusetts, argued the cause for petitioner. With her on the briefs were Francis X. Bellotti, Attorney General, and Stephen R. Delinsky, Assistant Attorney General.

Robert S. Cohen argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent. *

[ Footnote * ] Fred E. Inbau, Wayne W. Schmidt, Robert Smith, and James P. Costello filed a brief for Americans for Effective Law Enforcement, Inc., as amicus curiae urging reversal.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.

MR. JUSTICE POWELL took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Page 439 U.S. 280, 281



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial