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.
Drews et al. v. Maryland; Turner v. City of Memphis et al.; Tinsley v. City of Richmond, 1961 — 368 U.S. 894 · caselaw · US
General
Drews et al. v. Maryland; Turner v. City of Memphis et al.; Tinsley v. City of Richmond
368 U.S. 894·Supreme Court of the United States·1961
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. 71.
No. 84.
No. 315.
Drews et al. v. Maryland, Turner v. City of Memphis et al., Tinsley v. City of Richmond
[MAJORITY]
on appeal from the Court of Appeals of Maryland;
on appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee (question of jurisdiction postponed, ante, p. 808); and
(appeal dismissed, ante, p. 18). Motions of Thurgood Marshall for leave to withdraw appearances as counsel for appellants granted.