General
LAINO v. NEW YORK
374 U.S. 104·Supreme Court of the United States·1963
Mr. Justice Black and Mr. Justice Douglas are 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
LAINO v. NEW YORK.
No. 992.
Decided June 10, 1963.
Edward H. Levine and Vernon.C. Rossner for appellant.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New,York, and Robert E. Fischer and Maxwell B.Spoont, Special Assistant Attorneys General, for appellee.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motion to dismiss is granted and. the appeal is dismissed. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of. certiorari, certiorari is denied.
Mr. Justice Black and Mr. Justice Douglas are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.