Everett v. Truman

Supreme Court

Everett v. Truman

334 U.S. 824, 92 L. Ed. 1753, 68 S. Ct. 1081, 1948 U.S. LEXIS 2177

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedMay 18, 1948

DocketNo. 512

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 334 U.S. 824 (Everett v. Truman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Everett v. Truman, 334 U.S. 824, 92 L. Ed. 1753, 68 S. Ct. 1081, 1948 U.S. LEXIS 2177 (1948).

Pincite

Opinion

The Court met in Special Term pursuant to a call by The Chief Justice having the approval of all the Associate Justices. The motion for leave to file a petition for an original writ of habeas corpus for relief from sentences upon the verdicts of a General Military Government Court at Dachau, Germany, is denied. The Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Reed, Mr. Justice Frankfurter, and Mr. Justice Burton are of the opinion that there is want of jurisdiction. U. S. Constitution, Article III, § 2, Clause 2; see Ex parte Betz and companion cases, all 329 U. S. 672 (1946); Milch v. United States, 332 U. S. 789 (1947); Brandt v. United States, 333 U. S. [825]*825836 (1948); In re Eichel, 333 U. S. 865 (1948).

Willis M. Everett, Jr. pro se. Mr. Justice Black, Mr. Justice Douglas, Mr. Justice Murphy, and Mr. Justice Rutledge are of the opinion that the motion for leave to file the petition should be granted and that the case should be set for argument forthwith. Mr. Justice Jackson took no part in the consideration or decision of the motion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The Court met in Special Term pursuant to a call by The Chief Justice having the approval of all the Associate Justices. The motion for leave to file a petition for an original writ of habeas corpus for relief from sentences upon the verdicts of a General Military Government Court at Dachau, Germany, is denied. The Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Reed, Mr. Justice Frankfurter, and Mr. Justice Burton are of the opinion that there is want of jurisdiction. U. S. Constitution, Article III, § 2, Clause 2; see Ex parte Betz and companion cases, all 329 U. S. 672 (1946); Milch v. United States, 332 U. S. 789 (1947); Brandt v. United States, 333 U. S. [825]*825836 (1948); In re Eichel, 333 U. S. 865 (1948).

Willis M. Everett, Jr. pro se. Mr. Justice Black, Mr. Justice Douglas, Mr. Justice Murphy, and Mr. Justice Rutledge are of the opinion that the motion for leave to file the petition should be granted and that the case should be set for argument forthwith. Mr. Justice Jackson took no part in the consideration or decision of the motion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

334 U.S. 824, 92 L. Ed. 1753, 68 S. Ct. 1081, 1948 U.S. LEXIS 2177, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/everett-v-truman-scotus-1948.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack