Skip to content


Mississippi Vs. Finch - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number396 U.S. 553
AppellantMississippi
RespondentFinch
Excerpt:
..... no. 39, orig. decided february 2, 1970 state of mississippi's motion for leave to file complaint invoking court's original jurisdiction fails to state claim warranting exercise of such jurisdiction. motion denied. john bell williams, governor of mississippi, a. f. summer, attorney general, and william a. allain, assistant attorney general, on the motion. per curiam. on february 2, 1970, the plaintiff filed a motion seeking leave to file a complaint invoking the original jurisdiction of this court naming robert finch, individually and as secretary of the department of health, education, and welfare, and john n. mitchell, individually and as attorney general of the united states, as defendants. the alleged emergent nature of the claims for relief.....
Judgment:
MISSISSIPPI v. FINCH - 396 U.S. 553 (1970)
U.S. Supreme Court MISSISSIPPI v. FINCH, 396 U.S. 553 (1970) 396 U.S. 553

MISSISSIPPI v. FINCH, SECRETARY OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE ET AL.
ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BILL OF COMPLAINT
No. 39, Orig.
Decided February 2, 1970

State of Mississippi's motion for leave to file complaint invoking Court's original jurisdiction fails to state claim warranting exercise of such jurisdiction.

Motion denied.

John Bell Williams, Governor of Mississippi, A. F. Summer, Attorney General, and William A. Allain, Assistant Attorney General, on the motion.

PER CURIAM.

On February 2, 1970, the plaintiff filed a motion seeking leave to file a complaint invoking the original jurisdiction of this Court naming Robert Finch, individually and as Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and John N. Mitchell, individually and as Attorney General of the United States, as defendants.

The alleged emergent nature of the claims for relief led the Court to give expedited consideration to the motion and proffered complaint and, having examined the complaint, we conclude it fails to state a claim against either of the defendants warranting the exercise of the original jurisdiction of this Court.

Accordingly, the motion for leave to file the said complaint is denied.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.

Page 396 U.S. 553, 554




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