BAILEY ET AL.
v.
PATTERSON ET AL.

U.S. | 1961-12-18
Mr. Justice Black and Mr. Justice Frankfurter concur in the denial of a stay solely on the ground that the three movants are not themselves being prosecuted or threatened with prosecutions in Mississippi and they therefore reach no other questions.
368 U.S. 346 Supreme Court of the United States (1961) Negative Treatment
Also reported at: 7 L. Ed. 2d 332 · 82 S. Ct. 282 · SCDB 1961-019 · 1961 U.S. LEXIS 4
Cited by 14 cases

Per_curiam
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

This is a motion for an injunction to stay the prosecution of a number of criminal cases in the courts of Mississippi pending an appeal to this Court from the judgment of a three-judge Federal District Court. A federal injunction to stay state criminal proceedings is an extraordinary remedy. Cf. Douglas v. City of Jeannette, 319 U. S. 157; Ex parte Young, 209 U. S. 123. In addition to the considerations normally attending an application for such relief, a serious question of standing is presented on this motion, in that it appears that the movants themselves are not being prosecuted in the Mississippi courts. On the record before us the motion for a stay injunction pending appeal is denied.

Mr. Justice Black and Mr. Justice Frankfurter concur in the denial of a stay solely on the ground that the three movants are not themselves being prosecuted or threatened with prosecutions in Mississippi and they therefore reach no other questions.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Bailey v. Patterson, 369 U.S. 31 (U.S. 1962)
    …ged laws by the state courts. 199 F. Supp. 595. Plaintiffs have appealed, 28 U. S. C. § 1253; N. A. A. C. P. v. Bennett, 360 U. S. 471. We denied a motion to stay the prosecution of a number of criminal cases pending disposition of this appeal. 368 U. S. 346. Appellants lack standing to enjoin criminal prosecutions under Mississippi’s breach-of-peace statutes, since they do not allege that they , have been prosecuted or threatened with prosecution under them. They cannot [*33] represent a class of whom…
  • Wagner v. Dir., Fed. Emergency Mgmt. Agency, 847 F.2d 515 (9th Cir. 1988)
    …overeign/proprietary distinction affects the application of the government estoppel doctrine. See Merrill, 332 U.S. at 383-84, 68 S.Ct. at 2-3; see also Phelps, 785 F. 2d at 17; cf. Federal Land Bank v. Board of County Comm’rs, 368 U.S. 146, 150-51, 82 S.Ct. 282, 285-86, 7 L.Ed.2d 199 (1961) ("our decisions have made it clear that the Federal Government performs no 'proprietary* functions”).…
  • Stefan Ray Aronow v. United States, 432 F.2d 242 (9th Cir. 1970)
    …der 28 U.S.C. § 2282 unless there are substantial grounds for attacking the constitutionality of the Congressional enactment in question. Ex Parte Poresky, 290 U.S. 30, 54 S.Ct. 3, 78 L.Ed. 152 (1933); Bailey v. Patterson, 369 U.S. 31, 82 S.Ct. 549, 7 L.Ed.2d 332 (1962). It is quite obvious that the national motto and the slogan on coinage and currency “In God We Trust” has nothing whatsoever to do with the establishment of religion. Its use is of a patriotic or ceremonial character and bears no true resemb…

Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw