Badgley v. Hare

87 S. Ct. 338 · Supreme Court of the United States · Nov 21, 1966

Full text

Badgley v. Hare

Opinions in this case

Opinion — Per curiam
Majority

385 U.S. 114 (1966) BADGLEY ET AL. v. HARE, SECRETARY OF STATE OF MICHIGAN, ET AL. No. 505. Supreme Court of United States. Decided November 21, 1966. APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF MICHIGAN. William T. Gossett for appellants. Frank J. Kelly, Attorney General of Michigan, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, and Curtis G. Beck, Assistant Attorney General, for Hare; Theodore Sachs for Scholle et al., appellees. PER CURIAM. The motions to dismiss are granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.

Notice

Freecase is a legal research tool. It does not determine whether a case is good law and does not provide legal advice.

Metadata

Status: Published
Author
Judges: Per Curiam
Cluster ID: 1087944

Citations

87 S. Ct. 338
17 L. Ed. 2d 207
385 U.S. 114
1966 U.S. LEXIS 181

Cited by

In Re Apportionment, State Legislature-1992
Michigan Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1992
Neff v. Secretary of State
Michigan Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1992
Cummings v. Meskill

Freecase.ai provides legal information for educational and research purposes only. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Always consult a licensed attorney for legal guidance. Terms of Service

D. Connecticut · Jun 12, 1972

Cousins v. City Council of City of Chicago

N.D. Illinois · Jan 22, 1971

Skolnick v. Mayor of Chicago

N.D. Illinois · Nov 14, 1970

Wells v. Rockefeller

S.D. New York · May 18, 1970

Sincock v. Gately

D. Delaware · Jan 10, 1967

Parentheticals

discussed in Sincock v. Gately at 262 F. Supp. 832-833
Skolnick v. Mayor of Chicago