TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Edgar D. Whitcomb, Applicants v. Communist Party of Indiana No. A-370

Whitcomb, Governor of Indiana, Et Al. v. Communist Party of Indiana Et Al.

Whitcomb v. Communist Party of Ind. No. A-370, 409 U.S. 806 (1972)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
October 5, 1972
Docket
No. A-370
Judges
Communist, Douglas, Party
Citations
409 U.S. 80693 S. Ct. 2834 L. Ed. 2d 641972 U.S. LEXIS 1855

Opinion

D. C. N. D. Ind. Motion of applicants for emergency stay presented to Mr. Justice Rehnquist, and by him referred to the Court, denied as moot. Cross motion of Communist *807 Party of Indiana et al. to petition for mandate to enforce prior order of United States District Court also denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas would treat motion of Communist Party of Indiana et al. as jurisdictional statement and postpone question of jurisdiction to hearing of case on the merits.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

1977: 12003: 22004: 12013: 12019: 219772026peak 2003 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Trinity Industries, Inc. v. Chicago Bridge & Iron Co.735 F.3d 131 (3d Cir. 2013)
  2. Klay v. United Healthgroup, Inc.376 F.3d 1092 (11th Cir. 2004)
  3. In re Microsoft Corporation Antitrust Litigation333 F.3d 517 (4th Cir. 2003)
  4. Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC v. 6.56 Acres of Land915 F.3d 197 (4th Cir. 2019)
  5. Sophie Ruskay v. Chauncey L. Waddell552 F.2d 392 (2d Cir. 1977)
  6. Sun Microsystems, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.333 F.3d 517 (4th Cir. 2003)

Most recent

  1. McLAUGHLIN v. ZAVADANo. 2:19-cv-00422 (W.D. Pa. Nov. 4, 2019)
  2. Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC v. 6.56 Acres of Land915 F.3d 197 (4th Cir. 2019)
  3. Trinity Industries, Inc. v. Chicago Bridge & Iron Co.735 F.3d 131 (3d Cir. 2013)
  4. Klay v. United Healthgroup, Inc.376 F.3d 1092 (11th Cir. 2004)
  5. Sun Microsystems, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.333 F.3d 517 (4th Cir. 2003)
  6. In re Microsoft Corporation Antitrust Litigation333 F.3d 517 (4th Cir. 2003)

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