History
  • No items yet
midpage
Kirkpatrick v. Preisler
385 U.S. 450
| SCOTUS | 1967
|
Check Treatment
385 U.S. 450 (1967)

KIRKPATRICK, SECRETARY OF STATE OF MISSOURI, ET AL.
v.
PREISLER ET AL.

No. 738.

Supreme Court of United States.

Decided January 9, 1967.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI.

Norman H. Anderson, Attorney General of Missouri, and J. Gordon Siddens and Thomas J. Downey, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellants.

Paul W. Preisler, pro se, and for other appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motion to affirm is granted and the judgment is affirmed.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN and MR. JUSTICE STEWART are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the case set for oral argument.

Case Details

Case Name: Kirkpatrick v. Preisler
Court Name: Supreme Court of the United States
Date Published: Jan 9, 1967
Citation: 385 U.S. 450
Docket Number: 738
Court Abbreviation: SCOTUS
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Add Column
No results found

Notebook

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.

What are you researching?

Are reduced-form regression models acceptable evidence of class-wide impact at the class certification stage?
If Delaware is a company's place of incorporation, is that enough to establish personal jurisdiction and venue in Delaware?
What is the meaning of "after the pleadings are closed" in rule 12c of the frcp? Do pleadings include motions to dismiss counterclaims? Preferred jurisdiction is MA District court, but would take anything from the 1st circuit.