Home/Supreme Court/Ringgold v. Borough of Collingswood

Ringgold v. Borough of Collingswood

426 U.S. 901, 96 S. Ct. 2220
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedJune 1, 1976
DocketNo. 74-1335
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 426 U.S. 901 (Ringgold v. Borough of Collingswood) 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
Ringgold v. Borough of Collingswood, 426 U.S. 901, 96 S. Ct. 2220 (1976).

Opinion

Appeal from Sup. Ct. N. J. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.

Mr. Justice Brennan, Mr. Justice Marshall, and Mr. Justice Blackmun would vacate judgment and remand case for further consideration in light of Hynes v. Mayor of Borough of Oradell, 425 U. S. 610 (1976). Mr. Justice Stevens took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

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

Related

State v. Russo
745 A.2d 540 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2000)
Robbiani v. Burke
390 A.2d 1149 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1978)
New Jersey State Chamber of Commerce v. New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission
382 A.2d 670 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1977)
Frazier v. Liberty Mutual Insurance
374 A.2d 1259 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1977)
State v. Kowitski
367 A.2d 459 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1976)
Colorado Springs Amusements, Ltd., Etc. v. Frank L. Rizzo, Mayor of Philadelphia
428 U.S. 913 (Supreme Court, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
426 U.S. 901, 96 S. Ct. 2220, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ringgold-v-borough-of-collingswood-scotus-1976.