REDRUP
v.
NEW YORK

U.S. | 1966-04-25
No. 72
Mr. Justice Black, Mr. Justice Douglas and Mr. Justice Stewart are of the opinion that certiorari should be granted on all the questions presented by the petition.
384 U.S. 916 Supreme Court of the United States (1966) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion

Full opinion text not available for this case.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Redrup v. New York, 386 U.S. 767 (U.S. 1967)
    …. Rev. Stat. § 436.100. The Kentucky Court of Appeals denied plenary review of the petitioner’s conviction, the Chief Justice dissenting. 386 S. W. 2d 270. Ark. Stat. Ann. §§ 41-2713 to 41-2728. 239 Ark. 474, 393 S. W. 2d 219. Redrup v. New York, 384 U. S. 916; Austin v. Kentucky, 384 U. S. 916; Gent v. Arkansas, 384 U. S. 937. In each cf the cases before us, the contention that the publications involved were basically protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments was timely but unsuccessfully asserte…
    1 / 2
  • Sigety v. Abrams, 632 F.2d 969 (2d Cir. 1980)
    …cept every explanation offered by a party seeking a method by which to avoid compliance with a subpoena. Nilva v. United States, 352 U.S. 385, 77 S.Ct. 431, 1 L.Ed.2d 415 (1957); Lopiparo v. United States, 216 F. 2d 87 (8th Cir. 1954), cert. denied, 384 U.S. 916, 75 S.Ct. 297, 99 L.Ed. 718 (1955); United States v. McGovern, 60 F. 2d 880 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 287 U.S. 650, 53 S.Ct. 96, 77 L.Ed. 561 (1932). In the instant case Justice McQuillan was unable to accept Sigety’s explanation, finding his testi…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw