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.
YORTY et al. v. JORDAN, SECRETARY OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 1964 — 379 U.S. 8 · caselaw · US
General
YORTY et al. v. JORDAN, SECRETARY OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA
379 U.S. 8·Supreme Court of the United States·1964
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
YORTY et al. v. JORDAN, SECRETARY OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
No. 250.
Decided October 12, 1964.
Roger Arnebergh, Bourke Jones and James A. Doherty for appellants.
Stanley Mosk, Attorney General of California, Charles E. Corker and Charles A. Barrett, Assistant Attorneys General, and Sanford N. Grushin, Deputy Attorney General, for appellee.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.