Skip to content


Montgomery Vs. Kaiser - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number397 U.S. 595
AppellantMontgomery
RespondentKaiser
Excerpt:
.....kaiser et al. no. 828. supreme court of the united states april 20, 1970 thomas c. lynch, atty. gen. of california, and elizabeth palmer, deputy atty. gen., for appellants. thomas l. fike, for appellees. per curiam. the judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the united states district court for the northern district of california for further consideration in light of dandridge v. williams, 397 u.s. 471 . mr. justice douglas, mr. justice brennan, and mr. justice marshall are of the opinion that the judgment should be affirmed.[ montgomery v. kaiser 397 u.s. 595 (1970) ]
Judgment:
MONTGOMERY v. KAISER - 397 U.S. 595 (1970)
U.S. Supreme Court MONTGOMERY v. KAISER , 397 U.S. 595 (1970)

397 U.S. 595

John MONTGOMERY, Director, California Department of Social Welfare, et al.
v.
Ernestine KAISER et al.
No. 828.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 20, 1970

Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen. of California, and Elizabeth Palmer, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellants.

Thomas L. Fike, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California for further consideration in light of Dandridge v. Williams, 397 U.S. 471 .

Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, Mr. Justice BRENNAN, and Mr. Justice MARSHALL are of the opinion that the judgment should be affirmed.[ Montgomery v. Kaiser 397 U.S. 595 (1970) ]


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