CHEEKS

v.

MARYLAND

Citator

Cited By

• Lewis v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 357 U.S. 10 (U.S. 1958)
  …t was instituted in the District Court for their enforcement. The District Court denied enforcement on the authority of Labor Board v. Pesante, 119 F. Supp. 444. The Court of Appeals reversed. 249 F. 2d 832. The case is here on a writ of certiorari. 355 U. S. 929. 1. Delegation of authority over the revocation of subpoenas. — The express authority of the Board to revoke extends only to subpoenas “requiring the production of any evidence,” not to subpoenas requiring the attendance and testimony of witnesses.…
• Palmore v. Superior Court of the Dist. of Columbia, 515 F.2d 1294 (D.C. Cir. 1975)
  …d. Oaks, supra note 15, at 209-11. During the late 1950’s and 1960’s, the Court began treating the motion as a writ of certiorari. Id. at 201-06; see, e. g., Carnley v. Cochran, 366 U.S. 958, 81 S.Ct. 1927, 6 L.Ed.2d 1253 (1961); Cheeks v. Maryland, 355 U.S. 929, 78 S.Ct. 415, 2 L.Ed.2d 413 (1958). The present Court appar-. ently treats the motions as miscellaneous orders and denies them explicitly as motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus. See note 18 infra. . See, e. g., Schwartz…