Leis v. Flynt
439 U.S. 438 (1979)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Leis v. Flynt, 439 U.S. 438 (1979)

Leis v. Flynt

No. 77-1618

Decided January 15, 1979

439 U.S. 438

Syllabus

The interest of out-of-state attorneys, who were not admitted to practice law in Ohio, in representing defendants in an Ohio criminal prosecution held not to be a cognizable property or liberty interest within the terms of the Fourteenth Amendment, absent any showing of an independent state or federal law source for the interest. Hence, the Constitution did not obligate the Ohio courts to accord such attorneys procedural due process on their application for permission to appear pro hac vice.

Certiorari granted; 574 F.2d 874, reversed and remanded.

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.