PIERSON ET AL.

v.

RAY ET AL.; AND RAY ET AL. V. PIERSON ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Fed. Crop Ins. Corp. v. Deerfield Groves Co., 195 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967)
  …orney’s fee be paid by defendant company under the provisions of F.S. Sec. 627.0127 F.S.A., we find that a like ruling was made under somewhat similar circumstances in Baker v. Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, 1965, 241 Or. 609, 407 P. 2d 841. At 384 U.S. 938, 86 S.Ct. 1459, 16 L.Ed.2d 538, the Supreme Court of the United States granted writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Oregon to review the decision, but on September 9th, 1966, the writ was dismissed “under Rule 60”,1 See 385 U.S. 801, 87 S.Ct.…
• Carmack v. Gibson, 363 F.2d 862 (5th Cir. 1966)
  …nt was properly dismissed as to the State Judge, who enjoys immunity to civil actions under the Civil Rights Act for acts not clearly in absence of all jurisdiction and authority. See Pierson v. Ray, 5 Cir., 1965, 352 F. 2d 213, cert. granted, 1966, 384 U.S. 938, 86 S.Ct. 1457, 16 L.Ed.2d 537 [May 16, 1966; 1966-1967 Docket Nos. 79, 94, 35 U.S.L.Week 3002]. The same is true as to the prosecutor, as there is no allegation in the complaint that in selecting the jury he was acting without the scope of his juri…

  ← 1 / 2 →