JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES, ST., WASHINGTON v. KING CTY. HOSP., 390 U.S. 598 (1968)

U.S. Supreme Court

JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES, ST., WASHINGTON v. KING CTY. HOSP., 390 U.S. 598 (1968)

390 U.S. 598

JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON ET AL. v. KING
COUNTY HOSPITAL UNIT NO. 1 (HARBORVIEW) ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF

WASHINGTON.

No. 1111.
Decided April 8, 1968.

278 F. Supp. 488, affirmed.

Victor V. Blackwell, Daniel Brink and Kenneth S. Jacobs for appellants.

John J. O'Connell, Attorney General of Washington, James B. Wilson, Assistant Attorney General, and James E. Kennedy for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed, Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS and MR. JUSTICE HARLAN would note probable jurisdiction and set the case for oral argument.

Page 390 U.S. 598, 599




U.S. Supreme Court

JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES, ST., WASHINGTON v. KING CTY. HOSP., 390 U.S. 598 (1968)

390 U.S. 598

JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON ET AL. v. KING
COUNTY HOSPITAL UNIT NO. 1 (HARBORVIEW) ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF

WASHINGTON.

No. 1111.
Decided April 8, 1968.

278 F. Supp. 488, affirmed.

Victor V. Blackwell, Daniel Brink and Kenneth S. Jacobs for appellants.

John J. O'Connell, Attorney General of Washington, James B. Wilson, Assistant Attorney General, and James E. Kennedy for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed, Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS and MR. JUSTICE HARLAN would note probable jurisdiction and set the case for oral argument.

Page 390 U.S. 598, 599

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.