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/439/8/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/439/8/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
Carey v. Wynn, 439 U.S. 8 (1978)
Carey v. Wynn
No. 78-229
Decided October 16, 1978
439 U.S. 8
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
Syllabus
This Court has no jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1253 over appeals from a three-judge District Court's declaratory judgment invalidating certain state statutory provisions, such judgment being appealable only to the Court of Appeals.
Appeals dismissed. Reported below: 449 F.Supp. 1302.
PER CURIAM.
A three-judge District Court entered a declaratory judgment holding unconstitutional certain sections of the Illinois Abortion Act of 1975, Ill.Rev.Stat., ch. 38, § 81-21 et seq. (Supp. 1976). Wynn v. Scott, 449 F.Supp. 1302 (ND Ill.1978). The District Court assumed that Illinois prosecutors would recognize and abide by the declaratory judgment, and denied plaintiffs' request for injunctive relief. Id. at 1331.
The appeals from the declaratory judgment invalidating certain provisions of the statute are dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Title 28 U.S.C. § 1253, the jurisdictional statute under which these appeals are taken, does not authorize an appeal from the grant or denial of declaratory relief alone. Gerstein v. Coe, 417 U. S. 279 (1974). The declaratory judgment is appealable to the Court of Appeals, and we are informed that appeals to that court have been taken.
Appeals dismissed.
MR. JUSTICE STEVENS took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.
* Together with No. 7239, Diamond v. Wynn et al., also on appeal from the same court.
