Schackman v. Arnebergh

U.S.

Court: Supreme Court of the United States

Citations: 387 U.S. 427, 87 S. Ct. 1622, 18 L. Ed. 2d 865, 1967 U.S. LEXIS 1332

Decision Date: 5/29/1967

Docket Number: No. 1186

Jurisdiction: U.S.

Bluebook Citation: Schackman v. Arnebergh, 387 U.S. 427, 87 S. Ct. 1622, 18 L. Ed. 2d 865, 1967 U.S. LEXIS 1332 (1967)

More Cases: U.S. decisions from 1967

SCHACKMAN et al. v. ARNEBERGH, CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES, et al.

Attorneys

Burton Marks for appellants.
Roger Arnebergh, pro se, Bourke Jones and Robert B. Burns for appellees Arnebergh et al.; Harold W. Kennedy, George Wakefield and Martin E. Weekes for appellees Younger et al.; and Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, pro se, and A. Barry Cappello, Deputy Attorney General, for appellee Lynch.

majority Per Curiam.

Appellants seek review by this Court of the refusal by the District Court to convene a three-judge District Court pursuant to 28 U. S. C. §§ 2281-2284. We have held that such review is available in the Court of Appeals, Idlewild Bon Voyage Liquor Corp. v. Epstein, 370 U. S. 713, and not in this Court. Buchanan v. Rhodes, 385 U. S. 3.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Chat with this case using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this case, check whether it is still good law, and see every case that cites it. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.