MCSURELY ET AL.

v.

RATLIFF

Citator

Cited By

• McSURELY v. McCLELLAN, 553 F.2d 1277 (D.C. Cir. 1976)
  …his case, e. g., the language of the order of 30 October 1967. We have quoted from this testimony only as a further, cumulative demonstration that the three-judge court never meant its custody order to be a secrecy order. . Stip. 13, App. 21. . See 389 U.S. 949, 88 S.Ct. 313, 19 L.Ed.2d 358 (1967). . 390 U.S. 914, 88 S.Ct. 845, 19 L.Ed.2d 974 (1968). . 390 U.S. 412, 88 S.Ct. 1112, 19 L.Ed.2d 1272 (1968). . “After the decision of the [three-judge] District Court and before the time for appeal had expired…
• McSURELY v. Ratliff, 398 F.2d 817 (6th Cir. 1968)
  …412, 88 S.Ct. 1112, 19 L.Ed.2d 1272. The stay order previously granted by the Supreme Court was continued in effect pending an appeal to this Court. Two other orders of the Supreme Court are reported at 390 U.S. 914, 88 S.Ct. 845, 19 L.Ed.2d 974 and 389 U.S. 949, 88 S.Ct. 313, 19 L.Ed.2d 358. The single issue now before this Court is whether the District Court erred in refusing to return to their owners documents which were seized in aid of a prosecution under an unconstitutional statute, now that the time…
• McSURELY v. McCLELLAN, 753 F.2d 88 (D.C. Cir. 1985)
  …e three-judge court denied the motion and ordered all parties to cooperate with the Subcommittee. November 10, 1967: The Supreme Court stayed the district court order on condition that the McSurelys obtain a ruling on the validity of the subpoenas. 389 U.S. 949, 88 S.Ct. 313, 19 L.Ed.2d 358 (1967). December 5, 1967: A hearing was held before the district court on the validity of the subpoenas. At that hearing, the McSurelys learned, for the first time, that John Brick, a Subcommittee investigator, had tak…