BEER v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 11 (1967)

U.S. Supreme Court Reports

BEER v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 11 (1967) BEER v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 11 (1967) 386 U.S. 11

BEER v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
CALIFORNIA. No. 858, Misc.
Decided February 13, 1967.

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

An application for a stay addressed to MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, and by him referred to the Court, is denied.

The judgment is affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.

Page 386 U.S. 11, 12




U.S. Supreme Court Reports

BEER v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 11 (1967) BEER v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA, 386 U.S. 11 (1967) 386 U.S. 11

BEER v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
CALIFORNIA. No. 858, Misc.
Decided February 13, 1967.

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

An application for a stay addressed to MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, and by him referred to the Court, is denied.

The judgment is affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.

Page 386 U.S. 11, 12

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.