JACKSON

v.

NELSON, WARDEN

Citator

Cited By

• LeFLORE v. Robinson, 434 F.2d 933 (5th Cir. 1970)
  …on the exercise of First Amendment rights. It was concluded that injunctive relief was not appropriate and that § 2283 should not be circumvented by the issuance of a declaratory judgment. That decision was affirmed per curiam by the Supreme Court, 391 U.S. 361, 88 S.Ct. 1671, 20 L.Ed.2d 647 [*955] (1968).2 Moreover, it has long been settled law that courts will not anticipate constitutional questions but will wait until a case is presented which requires the resolution of a constitutional issue. Addition…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Md. Citizens FOR A Representative Gen. Assembly v. Governor OF Maryland, 429 F.2d 606 (4th Cir. 1970)
  …rnia Water Service Co. v. Redding, 304 U.S. 252, 58 S.Ct. 865, 82 L.Ed. 1323. . See Cameron v. Johnson, 262 F.Supp. 873, aff’d on other grounds, 390 U.S. 611, 88 S.Ct. 1335, 20 L.Ed.2d 182; Brooks v. Briley, 274 F.Supp. 538, aff’d on other grounds, 391 U.S. 361, 88 S.Ct. 1671, 20 L.Ed.2d 647. . California Water Service Co. v. Redding, 304 U.S. 252, 58 S.Ct. 865. . Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co. v. Oklahoma Packing Co., 292 U.S. 386, 391, 54 S.Ct. 732, 78 L.Ed. 1318.…
• Honey v. Goodman, 432 F.2d 333 (6th Cir. 1970)
  …Sexton v. Barry, 233 F. 2d 220, 223-224 (6th Cir. 1956), and, predictably, the decisions of the lower courts within this Circuit are in discord. Compare, e. g., Brooks v. Briley, 274 F.Supp. 538 (M.D.Tenn.1967) (three-judge court), aff’d per curiam, 391 U.S. 361, 88 S.Ct. 1671, 20 L.Ed.2d 647 (1968) (holding that section 2283 bars not only federal injunctions against pending state court proceedings, but also declaratory judgments); Armstrong v. Ellington, 312 F.Supp. 1119 (W.D.Tenn. 1970) (three-judge court…

  ← 1 / 2 →