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.
JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON et al. v. KING COUNTY HOSPITAL UNIT NO. 1 (HARBOR-VIEW) et al., 1968 — 390 U.S. 598 · caselaw · US
General
JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON et al. v. KING COUNTY HOSPITAL UNIT NO. 1 (HARBOR-VIEW) et al.
390 U.S. 598·Supreme Court of the United States·1968
Mr. Justice Douglas and Mr. Justice Harlan would note probable jurisdiction and set the case for oral argument.
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
JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON et al. v. KING COUNTY HOSPITAL UNIT NO. 1 (HARBOR-VIEW) et al.
No. 1111.
Decided April 8, 1968.
Victor V. Blackwell, Daniel Brink and Kenneth S. Jacobs for appellants.
John J. O’Connell, Attorney General of Washington, James B. Wilson, Assistant Attorney General, and James E. Kennedy for appellees.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The judgment is affirmed, Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U. S. 158.
Mr. Justice Douglas and Mr. Justice Harlan would note probable jurisdiction and set the case for oral argument.