From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Holding v. Blankenship

U.S.
May 15, 1967
387 U.S. 94 (1967)

Opinion

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA.

No. 1088.

Decided May 15, 1967.

259 F. Supp. 694, reversed in part and appeal dismissed and certiorari denied in part.

Samuel W. Block, Thomas P. Sullivan and Paul C. Duncan for appellant.


Probable jurisdiction noted as to Question 1. The judgment of the District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma entered November 4, 1966, is reversed insofar as it adjudged provisions of §§ 1040.1 to 1040.10 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes to be constitutional. Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58. Treating the nonappealable issue presented by Question 2 as if contained in a petition for a writ of certiorari, the petition is denied. See Mishkin v. New York, 383 U.S. 502, 512.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN concurs in the denial of certiorari as to Question 2, but would affirm the judgment of the District Court as to Question 1.

MR. JUSTICE WHITE would note probable jurisdiction and set the case for oral argument.


Summaries of

Holding v. Blankenship

U.S.
May 15, 1967
387 U.S. 94 (1967)
Case details for

Holding v. Blankenship

Case Details

Full title:HOLDING, DBA GRAND NEWS v . BLANKENSHIP ET AL

Court:U.S.

Date published: May 15, 1967

Citations

387 U.S. 94 (1967)

Citing Cases

United Artists Corporation v. Harris

This ruling of unconstitutionality as to the last sentence of said section appears to be solidly supported by…

Henley v. Wise, (N.D.Ind. 1969)

Where in fact, basic constitutional questions are sought to be adjudicated, and the existence of the statute…