Skip to content


Maddox Vs. Willis - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number382 U.S. 18
AppellantMaddox
RespondentWillis
Excerpt:
.....court for the northern district of georgia. no. 308. decided october 11, 1965. appeal dismissed. william g. mcrae for appellant. jack greenberg, james m. nabrit iii and michael meltsner for appellees willis et al. acting solicitor general spritzer, assistant attorney general doar and harold h. greene for appellee katzenbach. per curiam. the motions to dismiss are granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. el paso electric co. v. calvert, 382 u.s. 18 (1965) 382 u.s. 18 (1965) "> u.s. supreme court el paso electric co. v. calvert, 382 u.s. 18 (1965) 382 u.s. 18 el paso electric co. v. calvert et al. appeal from the court of civil appeals of texas, third supreme judicial .....
Judgment:
MADDOX v. WILLIS - 382 U.S. 18 (1965)
U.S. Supreme Court MADDOX v. WILLIS, 382 U.S. 18 (1965) 382 U.S. 18

MADDOX v. WILLIS ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT
OF GEORGIA. No. 308.
Decided October 11, 1965.

Appeal dismissed.

William G. McRae for appellant.

Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit III and Michael Meltsner for appellees Willis et al. Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Doar and Harold H. Greene for appellee Katzenbach.

PER CURIAM.

The motions to dismiss are granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.


EL PASO ELECTRIC CO. v. CALVERT, <a href="/101092"> 382 U.S. 18 </a> (1965) 382 U.S. 18 (1965) "> U.S. Supreme Court EL PASO ELECTRIC CO. v. CALVERT, 382 U.S. 18 (1965) 382 U.S. 18

EL PASO ELECTRIC CO. v. CALVERT ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF TEXAS, THIRD SUPREME JUDICIAL
DISTRICT. No. 395.
Decided October 11, 1965.

385 S. W. 2d 542, appeal dismissed.

William Duncan for appellant.

Waggoner Carr, Attorney General of Texas, Hawthorne Phillips, First Assistant Attorney General, T. B. Wright, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Gordon C. Cass and H. Grady Chandler, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Page 382 U.S. 18, 19




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