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.

Black Vs. Amen

Black vs Amen

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Mar-03-1958
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/99503

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
355 U.S. 600
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

Black

Respondent

Amen

Excerpt

black v. amen - 355 u.s. 600 (1958) u.s. supreme court black v. amen, 355 u.s. 600 (1958) 355 u.s. 600 black et al. v. amen et al. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the tenth circuit. no. 13. argued november 12-13, 1957. decided march 3, 1958. on motion of petitioners, concurred in by attorneys for respondents, the case is remanded to the court of appeals with directions to remand it to the district court to enable the parties to file their joint motion for entry of judgment dismissing the action, as provided in a settlement agreement. reported below: 234 f.2d 12 . dean acheson argued the cause for petitioners. with him on the brief were stanley l. temko, scott w. lucas and malcolm miller. douglas f. smith argued the cause for respondents. with him on the brief were arthur r. seder, jr., d. arthur walker, jack o. brown and oliver h. hughes. per curiam. petitioners' amended motion, concurred in by the attorneys for respondents, is granted. the case is remanded to the court of appeals with directions to remand the cause to the united states district court for the district of kansas to enable the parties to file their joint motion for the entry of judgment dismissing the action, as provided in paragraph 3 of the settlement agreement dated february 27, 1958, a copy of which is annexed to the amended motion. mr. justice frankfurter desires to have it added that he assumes that the legal effect of the court's order, in which he joins, upon the opinion and judgment of the court of appeals in this case is the conventional one when a case has become moot here pending our decision on the merits. united states v. munsingwear, 340 u.s. 36, 39 . page 355 u.s. 600, 601

Full Judgment

BLACK v. AMEN - 355 U.S. 600 (1958)
U.S. Supreme Court BLACK v. AMEN, 355 U.S. 600 (1958) 355 U.S. 600

BLACK ET AL. v. AMEN ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT.
No. 13.
Argued November 12-13, 1957.
Decided March 3, 1958.

On motion of petitioners, concurred in by attorneys for respondents, the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals with directions to remand it to the District Court to enable the parties to file their joint motion for entry of judgment dismissing the action, as provided in a settlement agreement.

Reported below: 234 F.2d 12 .

Dean Acheson argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the brief were Stanley L. Temko, Scott W. Lucas and Malcolm Miller.

Douglas F. Smith argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief were Arthur R. Seder, Jr., D. Arthur Walker, Jack O. Brown and Oliver H. Hughes.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioners' amended motion, concurred in by the attorneys for respondents, is granted. The case is remanded to the Court of Appeals with directions to remand the cause to the United States District Court for the District of Kansas to enable the parties to file their joint motion for the entry of judgment dismissing the action, as provided in paragraph 3 of the Settlement Agreement dated February 27, 1958, a copy of which is annexed to the amended motion.

MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER desires to have it added that he assumes that the legal effect of the Court's order, in which he joins, upon the opinion and judgment of the Court of Appeals in this case is the conventional one when a case has become moot here pending our decision on the merits. United States v. Munsingwear, 340 U.S. 36, 39 .

Page 355 U.S. 600, 601



Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial