Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
ZWICKER v. WISCONSIN, 1969 — 396 U.S. 26 · caselaw · US
General
ZWICKER v. WISCONSIN
396 U.S. 26·Supreme Court of the United States·1969
Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
ZWICKER v. WISCONSIN
No. 686,
Misc.
Decided November 10, 1969
Anthony G. Amsterdam, Michael Meltsner, and Melvyn Zarr for appellant.
Robert W. Warren, Attorney General of Wisconsin, and William A. Platz, Sverre O. Tinglum, and William F. Eich, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed.
Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.