BRANIGIN v. DUDDLESTON, 391 U.S. 364 (1968)
U.S. Supreme Court
BRANIGIN v. DUDDLESTON, 391 U.S. 364 (1968) 391 U.S. 364BRANIGIN ET AL. v. DUDDLESTON ET
AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN
DISTRICT OF INDIANA. No. 1252.
Decided May 20, 1968.*
284 F. Supp. 176, affirmed.
[Footnote *] Together with No. 1263, Summers v. Duddleston et al., also on appeal from the same court.
John J. Dillon, Attorney General of Indiana, and Charles S. White for appellants in No. 1252. Marshall F. Kizer for appellant in No. 1263.
Leslie Duvall and William H. Sparrenberger for appellees in both cases.
PER CURIAM.
The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed.
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, for reasons contained in his memorandum of March 4, 1968 (390 U.S. 932, sub nom. Branigin v. Grills), in which he acquiesced in the denial of stays of enforcement of the District Court's judgment, also acquiesces in the Court's affirmance of that judgment.
U.S. Supreme Court
BRANIGIN v. DUDDLESTON, 391 U.S. 364 (1968) 391 U.S. 364 BRANIGIN ET AL. v. DUDDLESTON ET AL.APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN
DISTRICT OF INDIANA. No. 1252.
Decided May 20, 1968.*
284 F. Supp. 176, affirmed. [Footnote *] Together with No. 1263, Summers v. Duddleston et al., also on appeal from the same court. John J. Dillon, Attorney General of Indiana, and Charles S. White for appellants in No. 1252. Marshall F. Kizer for appellant in No. 1263. Leslie Duvall and William H. Sparrenberger for appellees in both cases. PER CURIAM. The motions to affirm are granted and the judgment is affirmed. MR. JUSTICE HARLAN, for reasons contained in his memorandum of March 4, 1968 (390 U.S. 932, sub nom. Branigin v. Grills), in which he acquiesced in the denial of stays of enforcement of the District Court's judgment, also acquiesces in the Court's affirmance of that judgment. Page 391 U.S. 364, 365
