Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/355/600/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/355/600/case.html
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.
