Eugene Holden v. Roger Arnebergh, City Attorney, Los Angeles
394 U.S. 102, 89 S. Ct. 926, 22 L. Ed. 2d 112, 1969 U.S. LEXIS 2377
Opinion
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed, it appearing that the judgment below rests upon an adequate state ground.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Eugene Holden v. Roger Arnebergh, City Attorney, Los Angeles, 394 U.S. 102, 89 S. Ct. 926, 22 L. Ed. 2d 112, 1969 U.S. LEXIS 2377 (1969).
394 U.S. 102 (Eugene Holden v. Roger Arnebergh, City Attorney, Los Angeles) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Los Angeles Police Protective League v. Gates
579 F. Supp. 36 (C.D. California, 1984)
Alfone v. Sarno
403 A.2d 9 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1979)
United States v. Robert Edward Johnson
476 F.2d 1251 (Fifth Circuit, 1973)
United States v. William Marshal Grans
472 F.2d 597 (Ninth Circuit, 1973)
United States v. James Adam Wood
454 F.2d 765 (Fourth Circuit, 1972)
Grabinger v. Conlisk
320 F. Supp. 1213 (N.D. Illinois, 1970)
Meyer v. Austin
319 F. Supp. 457 (M.D. Florida, 1970)
United States v. Stephen R. Evans
425 F.2d 302 (Ninth Circuit, 1970)
United States v. Hosmer
310 F. Supp. 1166 (D. Maine, 1970)
Miller v. State of California
6 Cal. App. 3d 202 (California Court of Appeal, 1970)
United States v. Thomas Owen Norman, Jr.
413 F.2d 789 (Sixth Circuit, 1969)