KAISER
v.
NEW YORK; SNYDER V. HARRIS ET AL.; HARRIS, U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE (WALKER, REAL PARTY IN INTEREST) V. NELSON, WARDEN; KENNEY V. AMERICAN CAN CO.; HOWE V. GENERAL MOTORS CORP.; NATIONAL SPONGE CUSHION CO., INC. V. ALLEN INDUSTRIES, INC., ET AL.; GOULD ET UX. V. AMERICAN WATER WORKS SERVICE CO., INC., ET AL.; ASHTON V. UNITED STATES; CASSASA V. CALIFORNIA; BUSH V. UNITED STATES; GLASS V. UNITED STATES
KAISER
NEW YORK; SNYDER V. HARRIS ET AL.; HARRIS, U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE (WALKER, REAL PARTY IN INTEREST) V. NELSON, WARDEN; KENNEY V. AMERICAN CAN CO.; HOWE V. GENERAL MOTORS CORP.; NATIONAL SPONGE CUSHION CO., INC. V. ALLEN INDUSTRIES, INC., ET AL.; GOULD ET UX. V. AMERICAN WATER WORKS SERVICE CO., INC., ET AL.; ASHTON V. UNITED STATES; CASSASA V. CALIFORNIA; BUSH V. UNITED STATES; GLASS V. UNITED STATES
394 U.S. 1025
Supreme Court of the United States (1969)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 7 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jhirad v. Ferrandina, 536 F.2d 478 (2d Cir. 1976)…ses that the hearing below occurred on remand from a habeas appeal and that he was therefore entitled to all the procedural protections afforded by 28 U.S.C. § 2246. See also, Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 286, 89 S.Ct. 1082, 22 L.Ed.2d 281, reh. den., 394 U.S. 1025, 89 S.Ct. 1623, 23 L.Ed.2d 50 (1969). The decision in Harris upon which appellant so heavily relies merely points out that the district judge has the right to authorize such discovery procedures “as law and justice require,” 28 U.S.C. § 2243. It pl…
-
Kaiser v. Cahn, 510 F.2d 282 (2d Cir. 1974)…United States Supreme Court. 28 A.D.2d 647, 282 N.Y. S.2d 207 (2d Dept.), aff’d, 21 N.Y.2d 86, 286 N.Y.S.2d 801, 233 N.E. 2d 818 (1967), aff’d, 394 U.S. 280, 89 S.Ct. 1044, 22 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969). It was only after the Supreme Court denied rehearing, 394 U.S. 1025, 89 S.Ct. 1622, 23 L.Ed.2d 50 (1969), that Kaiser reentered prison on July 9, 1969 to complete his sentence. Kaiser brought this action for $500,000 in compensatory damages and $500,000 in punitive damages against the District Attorney who prosecut…
-
In re Estelle, 516 F.2d 480 (5th Cir. 1975)…t to do so. Certain discretionary acts [*484] lie within the inherent authority of the trial court, despite the lack of specific authorization by statute or rule. See, e.g., Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 286, 89 S.Ct. 1082, 22 L.Ed.2d 281, reh. denied, 394 U.S. 1025, 89 S.Ct. 1623, 23 L.Ed.2d 50 (1969), where the Supreme Court held that the district court had inherent authority to compel answers to interrogatories in habeas corpus proceedings, and thus that mandamus would not lie to prevent the district court f…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence