HARRISON v. McNAMARA, 380 U.S. 261 (1965)
U.S. Supreme Court
HARRISON v. McNAMARA, 380 U.S. 261 (1965) 380 U.S. 261 HARRISON v. McNAMARA, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT
OF CONNECTICUT. No. 527, Misc.
Decided March 15, 1965.
228 F. Supp. 406, affirmed.
Burton M. Weinstein for appellant.
Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Yeagley, Kevin T. Maroney and Lee B. Anderson for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.
U.S. Supreme Court
GENOVESE v. OHIO, 380 U.S. 261 (1965) 380 U.S. 261 GENOVESE v. OHIO.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO.
No. 794, Misc.
Decided March 15, 1965.
Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.
Appellant pro se.
Fred V. Skok, Barry M. Byron and Alan D. Wright for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.
U.S. Supreme Court
HARRISON v. McNAMARA, 380 U.S. 261 (1965) 380 U.S. 261 HARRISON v. McNAMARA, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT
OF CONNECTICUT. No. 527, Misc.
Decided March 15, 1965.
228 F. Supp. 406, affirmed.
Burton M. Weinstein for appellant.
Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Yeagley, Kevin T. Maroney and Lee B. Anderson for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.
U.S. Supreme Court
GENOVESE v. OHIO, 380 U.S. 261 (1965) 380 U.S. 261 GENOVESE v. OHIO.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO.
No. 794, Misc.
Decided March 15, 1965.
Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.
Appellant pro se.
Fred V. Skok, Barry M. Byron and Alan D. Wright for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.
Page 380 U.S. 261, 262
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.