Skip to content


Laino Vs. New York - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number374 U.S. 104
AppellantLaino
RespondentNew York
Excerpt:
..... mr. justice black and mr. justice douglas are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted. page 374 u.s. 104, 105 .....
Judgment:
LAINO v. NEW YORK - 374 U.S. 104 (1963)
U.S. Supreme Court LAINO v. NEW YORK, 374 U.S. 104 (1963) 374 U.S. 104

LAINO v. NEW YORK.
APPEAL FROM THE APPELLATE DIVISION, SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, FOURTH
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT. No. 992.
Decided June 10, 1963.

Appeal dismissed and certiorari denied.

Edward H. Levine and Vernon C. Rossner for appellant.

Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, and Robert E. Fischer and Maxwell B. Spoont, Special Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

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

MR. JUSTICE BLACK and MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.

Page 374 U.S. 104, 105




Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //