TANNENBAUM v. NEW YORK, 388 U.S. 439 (1967)

U.S. Supreme Court

TANNENBAUM v. NEW YORK, 388 U.S. 439 (1967)

388 U.S. 439

TANNENBAUM v. NEW YORK.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
No. 993.
Decided June 12, 1967.

18 N. Y. 2d 268, 220 N. E. 2d 783, appeal dismissed.

Osmond K. Fraenkel and Stanley Fleishman for appellant.

Frank S. Hogan for appellee.

Horace S. Manges for the American Book Publishers Council, Inc., as amicus curiae, in support of appellant.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed as moot.

MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN would reverse the judgment of the lower court.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WARREN, dissenting.

I dissent from the dismissal of this appeal as moot for the reasons stated in my dissent in Jacobs v. New York, ante, p. 431. In my view, the question presented by this case is extremely important and requires a decision on the merits by this Court. I would note probable jurisdiction and set the case for argument.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS dissents. (See dissent set forth in Jacobs v. New York, ante, at 436.)

Page 388 U.S. 439, 440




U.S. Supreme Court

TANNENBAUM v. NEW YORK, 388 U.S. 439 (1967)

388 U.S. 439

TANNENBAUM v. NEW YORK.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
No. 993.
Decided June 12, 1967.

18 N. Y. 2d 268, 220 N. E. 2d 783, appeal dismissed.

Osmond K. Fraenkel and Stanley Fleishman for appellant.

Frank S. Hogan for appellee.

Horace S. Manges for the American Book Publishers Council, Inc., as amicus curiae, in support of appellant.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed as moot.

MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN would reverse the judgment of the lower court.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WARREN, dissenting.

I dissent from the dismissal of this appeal as moot for the reasons stated in my dissent in Jacobs v. New York, ante, p. 431. In my view, the question presented by this case is extremely important and requires a decision on the merits by this Court. I would note probable jurisdiction and set the case for argument.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS dissents. (See dissent set forth in Jacobs v. New York, ante, at 436.)

Page 388 U.S. 439, 440

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.