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.
Moody et al. v. Flowers et al., 1966 — 385 U.S. 966 · caselaw · US
General
Moody et al. v. Flowers et al.
385 U.S. 966·Supreme Court of the United States·1966
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
No. 624.
Moody et al. v. Flowers et al.
Charles S. Rhyne and Brice W. Rhyne for appellants.
Richmond M. Flowers, Attorney General of Alabama, pro se, and Gordon Madison, Assistant Attorney General, for Flowers, and Truman Hobbs for Sellers et al., appel-lees.
[MAJORITY]
Appeal from D. C. M. D. Ala. Probable jurisdiction noted. Case is set for oral argument immediately following No. 430.