History
  • No items yet
midpage
Perez v. Ledesma
399 U.S. 924
SCOTUS
1970
Check Treatment

Appeal from D. C. E. D. La. Further consideration of question of jurisdiction in this case postponed to hearing of case on the merits. Case set to be argued with No. 4, Younger v. Harris, No. 6, Boyle v. Landry, No. 11, Samuels v. Mackell, No. 20, Fernandez v. Mackell, No. 565, Dyson v. Stein, and No. 1149, Byrne v. Karalexis. [Restored to calendar for reargument, supra.] In addition to questions presented in jurisdictional statement, parties requested to brief and argue the following questions:

(1) Was it an appropriate exercise of discretion for the three-judge court to grant the relief in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the judgment of August 14, 1969, in view of the pendency of the state prosecution charging violation of Louisiana Revised Statutes § 14:106?

(2) Was it an appropriate exercise of discretion for the three-judge court in paragraph 4 of said judgment to *925declare the St. Bernard Parish Ordinance No. 21-60 unconstitutional ?

Case Details

Case Name: Perez v. Ledesma
Court Name: Supreme Court of the United States
Date Published: Jun 29, 1970
Citation: 399 U.S. 924
Docket Number: No. 837
Court Abbreviation: SCOTUS
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.