MADDOX v. FORTSON, 397 U.S. 149 (1970)

Justia Opinion Summary and Annotations
Read more

U.S. Supreme Court

MADDOX v. FORTSON, 397 U.S. 149 (1970)

397 U.S. 149

MADDOX ET AL. v. FORTSON ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA
No. 1181.
Decided March 2, 1970

226 Ga. 71, 172 S. E. 2d 595, appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Tully M. Bond, Jr., and T. Malone Sharpe for appellants.

Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General of Georgia, pro se, Harold N. Hill, Jr., Executive Assistant Attorney General, and William L. Harper and Robert J. Castellani, Assistant Attorneys General, for Fortson et al.; Lamar W. Sizemore for Gray et al., and William C. O'Kelley and Earl J. Van Gerpen for the Republican Party of Georgia et al., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motions to dismiss are granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.

Page 397 U.S. 149, 150




U.S. Supreme Court

MADDOX v. FORTSON, 397 U.S. 149 (1970)

397 U.S. 149

MADDOX ET AL. v. FORTSON ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA
No. 1181.
Decided March 2, 1970

226 Ga. 71, 172 S. E. 2d 595, appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Tully M. Bond, Jr., and T. Malone Sharpe for appellants.

Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General of Georgia, pro se, Harold N. Hill, Jr., Executive Assistant Attorney General, and William L. Harper and Robert J. Castellani, Assistant Attorneys General, for Fortson et al.; Lamar W. Sizemore for Gray et al., and William C. O'Kelley and Earl J. Van Gerpen for the Republican Party of Georgia et al., appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motions to dismiss are granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.

Page 397 U.S. 149, 150

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.