McSurely v. Ratliff

390 U.S. 412, 19 L. Ed. 2d 1272, 88 S. Ct. 1112, 1968 U.S. LEXIS 2173
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided March 18, 1968·No. 1113·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The stay heretofore granted, post, p. 914, is continued for 30 days in order to afford the appellants an opportunity to apply to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit for a stay. If such timely application is made, the stay entered by this Court shall remain in effect until the Court of Appeals acts on that application.

Mr. Justice Black and Mr. Justice Douglas are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the case set for oral argument.

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

McSurely v. Ratliff, 390 U.S. 412, 19 L. Ed. 2d 1272, 88 S. Ct. 1112, 1968 U.S. LEXIS 2173 (1968).

390 U.S. 412 (McSurely v. Ratliff) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sovereign News Co. v. Falke
448 F. Supp. 306 (N.D. Ohio, 1977)
Barancik v. Investors Funding Corp. of New York
489 F.2d 933 (Seventh Circuit, 1973)
Barancik v. Investors Funding Corporation Of New York
489 F.2d 933 (Seventh Circuit, 1973)
Designation on Ballot of Candidates of Communist Party
59 Pa. D. & C.2d 1 (Pennsylvania Department of Justice, 1972)
(1972)
61 Op. Att'y Gen. 283 (Wisconsin Attorney General Reports, 1972)
McSurely v. Ratliff
398 F.2d 817 (Sixth Circuit, 1968)