McGILL v. RYALS, 385 U.S. 19 (1966)
Syllabus
U.S. Supreme Court
McGILL v. RYALS, 385 U.S. 19 (1966) 385 U.S. 19McGILL ET AL. v. RYALS, SHERIFF, ET
AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE
DISTRICT
OF ALABAMA. No. 381, Misc.
Decided October 17, 1966.
253 F. Supp. 374, appeal dismissed.
Vernon Z. Crawford, Morton Stavis, William M. Kunstler, Arthur Kinoy and Benjamin E. Smith for appellants.
Truman Hobbs for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction because the case was not appropriate for a three-judge court.
MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS is of the opinion that a three-judge court was properly convened and would affirm the judgment of the lower court.
Opinions
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT
OF ALABAMA. No. 381, Misc.
Decided October 17, 1966.
253 F. Supp. 374, appeal dismissed. Vernon Z. Crawford, Morton Stavis, William M. Kunstler, Arthur Kinoy and Benjamin E. Smith for appellants. Truman Hobbs for appellees. PER CURIAM. The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction because the case was not appropriate for a three-judge court. MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS is of the opinion that a three-judge court was properly convened and would affirm the judgment of the lower court. Page 385 U.S. 19, 20
U.S. Supreme Court
McGILL v. RYALS, 385 U.S. 19 (1966) 385 U.S. 19 McGILL ET AL. v. RYALS, SHERIFF, ET AL.APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT
OF ALABAMA. No. 381, Misc.
Decided October 17, 1966.
253 F. Supp. 374, appeal dismissed. Vernon Z. Crawford, Morton Stavis, William M. Kunstler, Arthur Kinoy and Benjamin E. Smith for appellants. Truman Hobbs for appellees. PER CURIAM. The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction because the case was not appropriate for a three-judge court. MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS is of the opinion that a three-judge court was properly convened and would affirm the judgment of the lower court. Page 385 U.S. 19, 20
Search This Case
