SKOLNICK

v.

KNOCH, U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE

Citator

Cited By

• Dusch v. Davis, 387 U.S. 112 (U.S. 1967)
  …nt challenging the validity of the Seven-Four Plan. The District Court approved this plan. The Court of Appeals reversed, 361 F. 2d 495. The case is here on appeal (28 U. S. C. § 1254 (2)) and we postponed the question of jurisdiction to the merits. 385 U. S. 999. For the reasons stated in Moody v. Flowers, ante, p. 97, the case is not one for a three-judge court, the charter being local only and not of statewide application. In Sailors v. Board of Education, ante, p. 105, we reserved the question whether…
• Scott v. Hunt OIL Co., 398 F.2d 810 (5th Cir. 1968)
  …he District Judge. Both writs were denied in unreported orders. See Nos. 23405 (February 21, 1966) and 24462 (March 9, 1967). Appellant also moved for leave to file a mandamus in the Supreme Court but this too was denied. See Scott v. Dawkins, 1967, 385 U.S. 999, 87 S.Ct. 749,17 L.Ed.2d 559.…
• Kramer v. Union Free Sch. Dist. NO. 15, 379 F.2d 491 (2d Cir. 1967)
  …are, after all, dealing in a very misty area when we struggle to determine the propriety of convening a three-judge court. The Supreme Court’s recent decisions in Moody v. Flowers, 385 U.S. 966, 87 S.Ct. 1544, 17 L.Ed.2d 431 (1967), Dusch v. Davis, 385 U.S. 999, 87 S.Ct. 1554, 17 L.Ed.2d 540 (1967), and Sailors v. Board of Educ., 385 U.S. 966, 87 S.Ct. 1549, 17 L.Ed.2d 431 (1967), bear witness to the difficulty the courts have encountered. In the case before us, while the defendants are not state officia…