Citation network
Ellis Vs. Dyson
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 19, 1975
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, 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
- Distinguished
- Relied / Followed
- Relied / Followed
-
U.S. 426 (1975) U.S. Supreme Court Ellis v. DysonSearch
-
U.S. 426 (1975) Ellis v. DysonSearch
-
injury to petitioners if the ordinance were enforced, a result felt to be mandated by the decision in Becker v. ThompsonSearch
-
F.2d 919 (CA5), wherein it was held that the principles of Younger v. HarrisSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Since the Becker decision was subsequently reversed in Steffel v. ThompsonSearch
-
and convictions. No injunctive relief against any future application of the statute to them was requested. Cf. Reed v. GiarrussoSearch
-
ordinance were enforced. This result, it concluded, was mandated by the decision of its controlling court in Becker v. ThompsonSearch
-
F.2d 919 (CA5 1972). In Becker, the Fifth Circuit had held that the principles of Younger v. HarrisSearch
-
After we unanimously reversed the Becker decision on which the District Court had relied, Steffel v. ThompsonSearch
-
a genuine threat of state prosecution. Unlike the situation where state prosecution is actually pending, cf. Samuel v. MackellSearch
-
is free of that requirement. Page 421 U. S. 433 415 U.S. at 415 U. S. 472 -473. See, e.g., Monroe v. PapeSearch
-
ibid., quoting Maryland Casualty Co. v. PacificSearch
-
Court of Appeals and remand the case to the District Court for reconsideration in the light of our opinion in Steffel v. ThompsonSearch
-
reversing Becker v. ThompsonSearch
-
the meaning of Art. III of the Constitution and of the Declaratory Judgment Act, may be said to exist. See Steffel v. ThompsonSearch
-
U.S. at 415 U. S. 458 -460. See generally Page 421 U. S. 435 O'Shea v. LittletonSearch
-
U. S. 81 (1971). Further, the credible threat must be shown to be alive at each stage of the litigation. Steffel v. ThompsonSearch
-
The denial may have been based on State ex rel. Bergeron v. TravisSearch
-
County Court, 76 Tex.Cr.R. 147, 153-154, 174 S.W. 365, 367-368 (1915), and State ex rel. Burks v. StovallSearch
-
We upheld a similar two-tier system in Colten v. KentuckySearch
-
denied both declaratory and injunctive relief, Steffel chose to appeal only the denial of declaratory relief. Becker v. ThompsonSearch
-
motion to dismiss petitioners' complaint because it regarded a prior decision of the Court of Appeals, Becker v. ThompsonSearch
-
ground of decision. Indeed, this Court has, on occasion, followed essentially the same practice. Secretary of the Navy v. AvrechSearch
-
Court's understanding of the law when it affirmed by order, 475 F.2d 1402 (CA5 1973). Later this Court, in Steffel v. ThompsonSearch
-
that court and the District Court had regarded as dispositive of this case. In Steffel, we held that Younger v. HarrisSearch
-
but under Younger v. HarrisSearch
-
the District Court was plainly correct in dismissing the claim, rather than ruling on its merits. Huffman v. PursueSearch
-
relief, and the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed. In its decision today, relying on Steffel v. ThompsonSearch
-
the state court's resolution of a constitutional claim generally is not binding on the federal court. See Brown v. AllenSearch
-
of their convictions, and thus could not satisfy the custody requirement of habeas corpus jurisdiction. E.g., Carafas v. LaValleeSearch
-
corpus relief on the basis of constitutional claims antecedent to and independent of the guilty pleas. E.g., Tollett v. HendersonSearch
-
Maryland Casualty Co. v. PacificSearch
-
s handbilling companion is ample demonstration that petitioner's concern with arrest has not been 'chimerical,' Poe v. UllmanSearch
-
petitioners may be arrested again, and, therefore, that the ordinance causes them real and immediate harm. See O'Shea v. LittletonSearch
-
justiciable despite the absence of actual threats of enforcement directed personally to the plaintiff. E.g., Doe v. BoltonSearch
-
U. S. 498 , 406 U. S. 506 -508 (1972). See CSC v. LetterSearch
-
petitioners regularly engage or in which they would engage but do not because of fear of prosecution. Compare CSC v. LetterSearch
-
United Public Workers v. MitchellSearch
-
need -- indeed, no jurisdiction -- to consider the claim further. The situation here is similar to that, in O'Shea v. LittletonSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial