SWANN v. ADAMS, 378 U.S. 553 (1964)
U.S. Supreme Court
SWANN v. ADAMS, 378 U.S. 553 (1964)
378 U.S. 553 SWANN v. ADAMS, SECRETARY OF STATE OF FLORIDA, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF
FLORIDA. No. 297.
Decided June 22, 1964.
Judgment reversed and case remanded.
Reported below: 214 F. Supp. 811.
Wm. Reece Smith, Jr. for appellant.
Richard W. Ervin, Attorney General of Florida, C. Graham Carothers, Special Assistant Attorney General, and Edward S. Jaffry and Joseph C. Jacobs, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The judgment below is reversed. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533. The case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the views stated in our opinions in Reynolds v. Sims and in the other cases relating to state legislative apportionment decided along with Reynolds.
MR. JUSTICE CLARK would reverse on the grounds stated in his opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 587.
MR. JUSTICE STEWART would remand for further proceedings consistent with the views expressed in his dissenting opinion in Lucas v. Forty-Fourth General Assembly of Colorado, 377 U.S. 713, 744.
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN dissents for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 589.
U.S. Supreme Court
SWANN v. ADAMS, 378 U.S. 553 (1964)
378 U.S. 553 SWANN v. ADAMS, SECRETARY OF STATE OF FLORIDA, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF
FLORIDA. No. 297.
Decided June 22, 1964.
Judgment reversed and case remanded.
Reported below: 214 F. Supp. 811.
Wm. Reece Smith, Jr. for appellant.
Richard W. Ervin, Attorney General of Florida, C. Graham Carothers, Special Assistant Attorney General, and Edward S. Jaffry and Joseph C. Jacobs, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The judgment below is reversed. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533. The case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the views stated in our opinions in Reynolds v. Sims and in the other cases relating to state legislative apportionment decided along with Reynolds.
MR. JUSTICE CLARK would reverse on the grounds stated in his opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 587.
MR. JUSTICE STEWART would remand for further proceedings consistent with the views expressed in his dissenting opinion in Lucas v. Forty-Fourth General Assembly of Colorado, 377 U.S. 713, 744.
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN dissents for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 589.
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.
