BURRUSS v. WILKERSON, 397 U.S. 44 (1970)

U.S. Supreme Court

BURRUSS v. WILKERSON, 397 U.S. 44 (1970)

397 U.S. 44

BURRUSS ET AL. v. WILKERSON ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA. No. 864.
Decided February 24, 1970

Affirmed.

Carl Rachlin, Melvin L. Wulf, and Eleanor Holmes Norton for appellants.

Robert Y. Button, Attorney General of Virginia, Richard N. Harris, Assistant Attorney General, John S. Davenport III, and Henry T. Wickham for appellees.

Briefs of amici curiae in support of appellants were filed by Ramsey Clark, David Rubin, and John W. Douglas for the National Education Association et al., and by Joseph L. Rauh, Jr., John Silard, J. Albert Woll, Thomas E. Harris, Stephen I. Schlossberg, and David A. Binder for the American Federation of Labor - Congress of Industrial Organizations et al.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS and MR. JUSTICE WHITE are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the case set for oral argument.

Page 397 U.S. 44, 45




U.S. Supreme Court

BURRUSS v. WILKERSON, 397 U.S. 44 (1970)

397 U.S. 44

BURRUSS ET AL. v. WILKERSON ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA. No. 864.
Decided February 24, 1970

Affirmed.

Carl Rachlin, Melvin L. Wulf, and Eleanor Holmes Norton for appellants.

Robert Y. Button, Attorney General of Virginia, Richard N. Harris, Assistant Attorney General, John S. Davenport III, and Henry T. Wickham for appellees.

Briefs of amici curiae in support of appellants were filed by Ramsey Clark, David Rubin, and John W. Douglas for the National Education Association et al., and by Joseph L. Rauh, Jr., John Silard, J. Albert Woll, Thomas E. Harris, Stephen I. Schlossberg, and David A. Binder for the American Federation of Labor - Congress of Industrial Organizations et al.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS and MR. JUSTICE WHITE are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the case set for oral argument.

Page 397 U.S. 44, 45

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.