PENNINGTON ET AL.
v.
CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI ET AL.
PENNINGTON ET AL.
CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI ET AL.
375 U.S. 439
Supreme Court of the United States (1964)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for a writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cintron-Garcia v. Romero-Barcelo, 671 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1982)…oting scheme for the State of Connecticut sustained), aff’d, 409 U.S. 972, 93 S.Ct. 313, 34 L.Ed.2d 236 (1972); Blaikie v. Power, 13 N.Y.2d 134, 243 N.Y.S.2d 185, 193 N.E. 2d 55 (limited voting for New York City Council sustained), appeal dismissed, 375 U.S. 439, 84 [*7] S.Ct. 507, 11 L.Ed.2d 471 (1964); People v. Carpentier, 30 Ill.2d 590, 198 N.E. 2d 514 (1964). Apparently, the two major parties, to take maximum advantage of their strength, do not run slates of 11 candidates, but, rather, slates of 6 ca…
-
Hammonds v. City OF Corpus Christi, 343 F.2d 162 (5th Cir. 1965)…844 (Tex.Civ.App.1964 — error ref’d n. r. e. by Tex.Sup.Ct.) (Appeal pending in U. S. Supreme Court); Pennington et al. v. City of Corpus Christi, 363 S.W. 2d 502 (Tex.Civ.App.1962 — error ref’d n. r. e.) (Appeal dismissed by U. S. Supreme Court, 375 U.S. 439, 84 S.Ct. 507, 11 L.Ed.2d 471). The only limitation under Texas law on the power of a home rule city like appellee to annex additional territory is that the territory shall be adjacent to the city and not included within the boundaries of any other…