TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Louisiana Ed. Comm'n for Needy Children v. Poindexter

La. Ed. Comm'n for Needy Children v. Poindexter, 393 U.S. 17 (1968)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
October 14, 1968
Docket
No. 284
Judges
Per Curiam
Citations
393 U.S. 1789 S. Ct. 4821 L. Ed. 2d 161968 U.S. LEXIS 587
Cited by 6

Opinion — Per Curiam

393 U.S. 17 (1968)

LOUISIANA EDUCATION COMMISSION FOR NEEDY CHILDREN ET AL.

v.

POINDEXTER ET AL.

No. 284.

Supreme Court of United States.

Decided October 14, 1968. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA.

Leander H. Perez and Luke A. Petrovich for appellants.

Solicitor General Griswold and Assistant Attorney General Pollak for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

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

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 6 cases

View all citing references →
1969: 11975: 11988: 11997: 12005: 12016: 119692026peak 1969 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Keith v. Volpe858 F.2d 467 (9th Cir. 1988)
  2. California v. United States Department of Labor155 F. Supp. 3d 1089 (E.D. Cal. 2016)
  3. Coleman v. Aycock304 F. Supp. 132 (N.D. Miss. 1969)
  4. Planned Parenthood of Southern Arizona v. Neely130 F.3d 400 (9th Cir. 1997)
  5. Hamlin ex rel. Hamlin v. City of Peekskill Board of Education377 F. Supp. 2d 379 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)
  6. Wheeler v. Barrera417 U.S. 402 (1975) · Dissent

Most recent

  1. California v. United States Department of Labor155 F. Supp. 3d 1089 (E.D. Cal. 2016)
  2. Hamlin ex rel. Hamlin v. City of Peekskill Board of Education377 F. Supp. 2d 379 (S.D.N.Y. 2005)
  3. Planned Parenthood of Southern Arizona v. Neely130 F.3d 400 (9th Cir. 1997)
  4. Keith v. Volpe858 F.2d 467 (9th Cir. 1988)
  5. Wheeler v. Barrera417 U.S. 402 (1975) · Dissent
  6. Coleman v. Aycock304 F. Supp. 132 (N.D. Miss. 1969)

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