Court : US Supreme Court
Scott v. Germano - 381 U.S. 407 (1965) U.S. Supreme Court Scott v. Germano, 381 U.S. 407 (1965) Scott v. Germano No. 1152 Decided June 1, 1965 381 U.S. 407 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS Syllabus After invalidating senatorial apportionment provisions in the Illinois Constitution and statutes, a Federal District Court ordered that any corrective provisions be submitted to it before any election thereunder, failing which it would issue a show cause order as to why State Senators should not be elected at large in 1966 and thereafter. Previously, a case had been filed in state court attacking the composition of the legislature which, after the federal court order, the State Supreme Court decided on appeal, holding the State Senate composition invalid. The court expressed confidence that the legislature, at its current session, would take corrective action and retained jurisdiction to insure that the 1966 election was pursuant t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Drews v. Maryland - 381 U.S. 421 (1965) U.S. Supreme Court Drews v. Maryland, 381 U.S. 421 (1965) Drews v. Maryland No. 1010 Decided June 1, 1965 381 U.S. 421 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied. Reported below: 236 Md. 349, 204 A.2d 64. PER CURIAM. The motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WARREN, with whom MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS joins, dissenting from the denial of certiorari. [ Footnote 1 ] On Sunday, Lacey, who are Negroes, and Helen W. Brown, Dale H. Drews, and Joseph C. Sheeham, who are white, went to Gwynn Oak Park, an amusement park in Baltimore County, Maryland. Ironically, the park was celebrating "All Nations Day." Shortly after 3 p.m., they Page 381 U. S. 422 were standing in a group by themselves and had, a park guard testified, attracted no...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1966SC91; [1966]1SCR243b
Shah, J. 1. In exercise of the powers conferred by Rule 30(1) of the Defence of India Rules, 1962, the District Magistrate, Delhi ordered that the petitioner be detained in the Central Jail, New Delhi. On September 11, J964 the District Magistrate informed the petitioner that the Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi, -hereinafter called 'the Administrator'-had reviewed the detention order, dated September 5, 1964, and had confirmed the same. On April 12, 1965 the petitioner moved this Court for an 'order setting aside his detention' and for an order for his release. He submitted, inter alia, that the District Magistrate had made the order for a collateral purpose; that there was nothing on the record to show that the District Magistrate reported forthwith the detention of the petitioner to the Administrator, or that the Administrator had reviewed the detention of the petitioner as required by law; and that in default of a 'proper review' of the detention order by the Administrator u...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Atlantic Refining v. FTC - 381 U.S. 357 (1965) U.S. Supreme Court Atlantic Refining v. FTC, 381 U.S. 357 (1965) Atlantic Refining v. Federal Trade Commission No. 292 Argued March 30, 1965 Decided June 1, 1965 * 381 U.S. 357 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT Syllabus The Atlantic Refining Co., a major producer and distributor of gasoline and oil products on the eastern seaboard, agreed with the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., the country's largest manufacturer of rubber products, to sponsor the sale of the latter's tires, batteries and accessories (TBA) to its many retail service station dealers and wholesale outlets. Atlantic was primarily responsible for promoting the sale of Goodyear products to its dealers and assisting in their resale, for which it received a commission on all sales made to the wholesalers and dealers. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) enjoined the use of direct methods of coercion by Atlantic on its dealers in the i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
United Gas Improvement Co. v. Continental Oil Co. - 381 U.S. 392 (1965) U.S. Supreme Court United Gas Improvement Co. v. Continental Oil Co., 381 U.S. 392 (1965) United Gas Improvement Co. v. Continental Oil Co. No. 644 Argued April 28, 1965 Decided June 1, 1965 * 381 U.S. 392 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Texas Eastern, which operates an interstate natural gas transmission system, agreed with certain producers to purchase for resale in interstate commerce their natural gas production in a substantially developed field with proven reserves. Before the Federal Power Commission (FPC) acted on the examiner's recommendation that certificates be granted, the " Catco " case ( Public Serv. Comm'n of New York v. FPC, 257 F. 2d 717, affirmed sub nom. Atlantic Refining Co. v. Public Serv. Comm'n of New York, 360 U. S. 378 ) decided that the certificate applicants there involved had not satisfied their burden of justifying the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Travia v. Lomenzo - 381 U.S. 431 (1965) U.S. Supreme Court Travia v. Lomenzo, 381 U.S. 431 (1965) Travia v. Lomenzo No. 1218 Decided June 1, 1965 381 U.S. 431 APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Motion to accelerate appeal and application for stay denied. PER CURIAM. The motion to accelerate the appeal is denied. The application for a stay, addressed to Mr. Justice Harlan as Circuit Justice and referred by him to the Court for consideration under Rule 50(6), is denied. MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, dissenting. An application has been made to me, as Circuit Justice, for a stay pending appeal from an order of a three-judge Page 381 U. S. 432 District Court, dated May 24, 1965, ordering New York to hold a special legislative election on November 2, 1965, under the electoral scheme embodied in reapportionment "Plan A" [ Footnote 1 ] passed by the New York Legislature, signed by the Governor, and held unconstitutional under the State Co...
Tag this Judgment!