TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Californians for an Alternative in November v. California

CALIFORNIANS FOR AN ALTERNATIVE IN NOVEMBER Et Al. v. CALIFORNIA Et Al.

Californians for an Alt. in November v. California, 393 U.S. 1 (1968)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
October 7, 1968
Docket
No. 605
Judges
Per Curiam
Citations
393 U.S. 189 S. Ct. 4321 L. Ed. 2d 11968 U.S. LEXIS 1129
Cited by 25

Opinion — Per Curiam

Per Curiam.

The appeal is dismissed. California is on the eve of a national election. Millions of ballots are being printed and in a few hours the absentee ballots will be sent out of State. Whatever may be the merits of the controversy, the shortness of time and the complicated task of preparing and distributing the ballots make it very doubtful if any effective relief would be possible.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 25 cases

View all citing references →
1972: 11973: 11975: 11977: 31978: 11979: 21981: 11982: 11990: 11994: 21996: 21998: 12005: 12007: 12008: 12019: 22021: 12022: 219722026peak 1977 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. People v. Bivens2021 IL App (1st) 172080-U
  2. People v. Lippert432 N.E.2d 605 (Ill. 1982)
  3. Radowick v. State244 S.E.2d 346 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978)
  4. City of Nome v. Ailak570 P.2d 162 (Alaska 1977)
  5. United States v. Eli M. Gorin564 F.2d 159 (4th Cir. 1977)
  6. First National Bank of Kansas City v. Danforth523 S.W.2d 808 (Mo. 1975)

Most recent

  1. Rich v. HerslNo. 1:20-cv-00488 (D. Maryland May 5, 2022)
  2. State v. LinNo. 47985 (Idaho Ct. App. Mar. 21, 2022)
  3. People v. Bivens2021 IL App (1st) 172080-U
  4. Curtis Clifford Ingram v. C. RachalNo. 2:19-cv-05605 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 12, 2019)
  5. Rothman v. City of New YorkNo. 1:19-cv-00225 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 5, 2019)
  6. David Trejo v. State of MississippiNo. 2008-CT-02133-SCT (Miss. Dec. 12, 2008)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list