Skip to content


Town of FranklIn Vs. Butterworth - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number378 U.S. 562
AppellantTown of Franklin
RespondentButterworth
Excerpt:
..... per curiam. the motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed. senk v. pennsylvania, 378 u.s. 562 (1964) 378 u.s. 562 (1964) "> u.s. supreme court senk v. pennsylvania, 378 u.s. 562 (1964) 378 u.s. 562 senk v. pennsylvania. on petition for writ of certiorari to the supreme court of pennsylvania. no. 900, misc. decided june 22, 1964. certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded. reported below: 412 pa. 184, 194 a. 2d 221. per curiam. the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. the judgment of the supreme court of pennsylvania is vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with the.....
Judgment:
TOWN OF FRANKLIN v. BUTTERWORTH - 378 U.S. 562 (1964)
U.S. Supreme Court TOWN OF FRANKLIN v. BUTTERWORTH, 378 U.S. 562 (1964) 378 U.S. 562

TOWN OF FRANKLIN ET AL. v. BUTTERWORTH ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF
CONNECTICUT. No. 1032.
Decided June 22, 1964.

229 F. Supp. 754, affirmed.

John D. Fassett for appellants.

Richard H. Bowerman for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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


SENK v. PENNSYLVANIA, <a href="/100823"> 378 U.S. 562 </a> (1964) 378 U.S. 562 (1964) "> U.S. Supreme Court SENK v. PENNSYLVANIA, 378 U.S. 562 (1964) 378 U.S. 562

SENK v. PENNSYLVANIA.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA.
No. 900, Misc.
Decided June 22, 1964.

Certiorari granted; judgment vacated; and case remanded.

Reported below: 412 Pa. 184, 194 A. 2d 221.

PER CURIAM.

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania is vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with the opinion of this Court in Jackson v. Denno, ante, p. 368.

MR. JUSTICE BLACK, MR. JUSTICE CLARK, MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE STEWART dissent for the reasons stated in their dissenting opinions in Jackson v. Denno, supra.

Page 378 U.S. 562, 563




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