Skip to content


Haswell Vs. Powell - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number390 U.S. 712
AppellantHaswell
RespondentPowell
Excerpt:
.....is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. times mirror co. v. united states, 390 u.s. 712 (1968) 390 u.s. 712 (1968) "> u.s. supreme court times mirror co. v. united states, 390 u.s. 712 (1968) 390 u.s. 712 times mirror co. v. united states. appeal from the united states district court for the central district of california. no. 1162. decided april 22, 1968. 274 f. supp. 606, affirmed. julian o. von kalinowski for appellant. solicitor general griswold, assistant attorney general turner and bernard m. hollander for the united states. per curiam. the motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed. mr. justice harlan would note probable.....
Judgment:
HASWELL v. POWELL - 390 U.S. 712 (1968)
U.S. Supreme Court HASWELL v. POWELL, 390 U.S. 712 (1968) 390 U.S. 712

HASWELL v. POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE OF ILLINOIS.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS.
No. 1055.
Decided April 22, 1968.

38 Ill. 2d 161, 230 N. E. 2d 178, appeal dismissed.

John C. Tucker for appellant.

William G. Clark, Attorney General of Illinois, and John J. O'Toole and Robert F. Nix, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

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


TIMES MIRROR CO. v. UNITED STATES, <a href="/102035"> 390 U.S. 712 </a> (1968) 390 U.S. 712 (1968) "> U.S. Supreme Court TIMES MIRROR CO. v. UNITED STATES, 390 U.S. 712 (1968) 390 U.S. 712

TIMES MIRROR CO. v. UNITED STATES.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF
CALIFORNIA. No. 1162.
Decided April 22, 1968.

274 F. Supp. 606, affirmed.

Julian O. von Kalinowski for appellant.

Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Turner and Bernard M. Hollander for the United States.

PER CURIAM.

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

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN would note probable jurisdiction and set the case for oral argument.

Page 390 U.S. 712, 713




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