HOHENSEE v. NEWS SYNDICATE, INC., 369 U.S. 659 (1962)

U.S. Supreme Court

HOHENSEE v. NEWS SYNDICATE, INC., 369 U.S. 659 (1962)

369 U.S. 659

HOHENSEE v. NEWS SYNDICATE, INC.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No. 214.
Decided May 14, 1962.

Certiorari granted; judgment vacated; case remanded for consideration in light of Goldlawr, Inc., v. Heiman, ante, p. 463.

Reported below: 286 F.2d 527.

James C. Newton for petitioner.

Stuart N. Updike for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for consideration in light of Goldlawr, Inc., v. Heiman, ante, p. 463.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE STEWART, for the reasons given in their dissent in the Goldlawr case, would deny certiorari.

MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Page 369 U.S. 659, 660




U.S. Supreme Court

HOHENSEE v. NEWS SYNDICATE, INC., 369 U.S. 659 (1962)

369 U.S. 659

HOHENSEE v. NEWS SYNDICATE, INC.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No. 214.
Decided May 14, 1962.

Certiorari granted; judgment vacated; case remanded for consideration in light of Goldlawr, Inc., v. Heiman, ante, p. 463.

Reported below: 286 F.2d 527.

James C. Newton for petitioner.

Stuart N. Updike for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for consideration in light of Goldlawr, Inc., v. Heiman, ante, p. 463.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE STEWART, for the reasons given in their dissent in the Goldlawr case, would deny certiorari.

MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Page 369 U.S. 659, 660

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.