TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Haines v. Pennsylvania

Haines, comprising Keystone Policyholders' Committee v. Pennsylvania

Haines v. Pennsylvania, 346 U.S. 852 (1953)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
October 19, 1953
Docket
No. 229
Citations
346 U.S. 85274 S. Ct. 6998 L. Ed. 3671953 U.S. LEXIS 1650
Cited by 7

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Appeal from the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Middle District.

Per Curiam:

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. 28 U. S. C. § 1257 (2). Treating the papers whereon the *853 appeal was allowed as a petition for writ of certiorari as required by 28 U. S. C. § 2103 , certiorari is denied.

Ellis G. Arnall and Cleburne E. Gregory, Jr. for appellants. D. Arthur Magasiner for appellees.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 7 cases

View all citing references →
1955: 11964: 11971: 11973: 11983: 11985: 11996: 119552026peak 1955 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Hoops v. State681 So. 2d 521 (Miss. 1996)
  2. Johnson v. State476 So. 2d 1195 (Miss. 1985)
  3. Matthew Winters v. Thomas D. Cook, Superintendent of the Mississippi State Penitentiary489 F.2d 174 (5th Cir. 1973)
  4. Baylor v. State246 So. 2d 516 (Miss. 1971)
  5. Gilmore v. State82 So. 2d 838 (Miss. 1955)
  6. United States v. Emergency Land Fund, Inc.569 F. Supp. 62 (S.D. Miss. 1983)

Most recent

  1. Hoops v. State681 So. 2d 521 (Miss. 1996)
  2. Johnson v. State476 So. 2d 1195 (Miss. 1985)
  3. United States v. Emergency Land Fund, Inc.569 F. Supp. 62 (S.D. Miss. 1983)
  4. Matthew Winters v. Thomas D. Cook, Superintendent of the Mississippi State Penitentiary489 F.2d 174 (5th Cir. 1973)
  5. Baylor v. State246 So. 2d 516 (Miss. 1971)
  6. United States v. Garth239 F. Supp. 164 (M.D. Ala. 1964)

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