PHILLIPS v. NEW YORK, 362 U.S. 456 (1960)

Justia Opinion Summary and Annotations
Read more

U.S. Supreme Court

PHILLIPS v. NEW YORK, 362 U.S. 456 (1960)

362 U.S. 456

PHILLIPS v. NEW YORK.
CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
No. 497.
Argued April 18, 1960.
Decided April 25, 1960.

Certiorari dismissed as improvidently granted.

Reported below: 6 N.Y.2d 788, 159 N.E.2d 677.

Henry W. Schober argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief were Anthony T. Antinozzi and Frank A. Fritz, Jr.

Joseph I. Heneghan argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Manuel W. Levine.

PER CURIAM.

After hearing oral argument and fully examining the record which was only partially set forth in the petition for certiorari, we conclude that the totality of circumstances as the record makes them manifest did not warrant bringing the case here. Accordingly, the writ is dismissed as improvidently granted.

Page 362 U.S. 456, 457

 


U.S. Supreme Court

PHILLIPS v. NEW YORK, 362 U.S. 456 (1960)

362 U.S. 456

PHILLIPS v. NEW YORK.
CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
No. 497.
Argued April 18, 1960.
Decided April 25, 1960.

Certiorari dismissed as improvidently granted.

Reported below: 6 N.Y.2d 788, 159 N.E.2d 677.

Henry W. Schober argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief were Anthony T. Antinozzi and Frank A. Fritz, Jr.

Joseph I. Heneghan argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Manuel W. Levine.

PER CURIAM.

After hearing oral argument and fully examining the record which was only partially set forth in the petition for certiorari, we conclude that the totality of circumstances as the record makes them manifest did not warrant bringing the case here. Accordingly, the writ is dismissed as improvidently granted.

Page 362 U.S. 456, 457

Oral Argument - April 18, 1960
Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law 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.

Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship.