DuVERNAY v. UNITED STATES, 394 U.S. 309 (1969)

U.S. Supreme Court

DuVERNAY v. UNITED STATES, 394 U.S. 309 (1969)

394 U.S. 309

DuVERNAY v. UNITED STATES.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT.
No. 814.
Argued February 27, 1969.
Decided March 24, 1969.

394 F.2d 979, affirmed by an equally divided Court.

Benjamin E. Smith argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief were Arthur Kinoy and Morton Stavis.

John S. Martin, Jr., argued the cause for the United States. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Wilson, and Philip R. Monahan.

Ann Fagan Ginger filed a brief for the National Lawyers Guild as amicus curiae urging reversal.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.

MR. JUSTICE FORTAS took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Page 394 U.S. 309, 310




U.S. Supreme Court

DuVERNAY v. UNITED STATES, 394 U.S. 309 (1969)

394 U.S. 309

DuVERNAY v. UNITED STATES.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT.
No. 814.
Argued February 27, 1969.
Decided March 24, 1969.

394 F.2d 979, affirmed by an equally divided Court.

Benjamin E. Smith argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief were Arthur Kinoy and Morton Stavis.

John S. Martin, Jr., argued the cause for the United States. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Wilson, and Philip R. Monahan.

Ann Fagan Ginger filed a brief for the National Lawyers Guild as amicus curiae urging reversal.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.

MR. JUSTICE FORTAS took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Page 394 U.S. 309, 310

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.