Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

JONES v. OPELIKA. Together with No. 314, October Term, 1941, Bowden et al.

Upon rehearing, 318 U.S. 796, the judgments heretofore entered in these cases, 316 U.S. 584, affirming the judgments of the state courts, are vacated, and the judgments of the state courts are reversed. P. 104. 242 Ala. 549, 7 So.2d 503, reversed. 202 Ark. 614, 151 S.W.2d 1000, reversed. 58 Ariz. 144, 118 P.2d 97, reversed.

PER CURIAM (announced by MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS):

The judgments in these cases were affirmed at the October Term, 1941. 316 U.S. 584. Because the issues in all three cases were of the same character as those brought before us in other cases by applications for certiorari at the present term, we ordered a reargument and heard these cases together with Murdock v. Pennsylvania, post, p. 105. For the reasons stated in the opinion of the Court in the Murdock case, and in the dissenting opinions filed in the present cases after the argument last term, the Court is of opinion that the judgment in each case should be reversed. The judgments of this Court heretofore entered in these cases are therefore vacated, and the judgments of the state courts are reversed.

So ordered.

For dissenting opinions, see post, pp. 117-140.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

JONES v. OPELIKA
(May 3, 1943)