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.
Connor v. Massachusetts; Landry v. Massachusetts; and Doherty v. Massachusetts, 1968 — 390 U.S. 982 · caselaw · US
General
Connor v. Massachusetts; Landry v. Massachusetts; and Doherty v. Massachusetts
390 U.S. 982·Supreme Court of the United States·1968
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. 942,
No. 955,
No. 1068,
Misc.
Misc.
Misc.
Connor v. Massachusetts; Landry v. Massachusetts; and Doherty v. Massachusetts.
James J. Twohig for petitioner in No. 942, Mise., and F. Lee Bailey for petitioner in No. 1068, Mise. Elliot L. Richardson, Attorney General of Massachusetts, and Willie J. Davis and Howard M. Miller, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent in all three cases.
[MAJORITY]
Sup. Jud. Ct. Mass. Certiorari denied.
Reported below: 353 Mass. 197, 229 N. E. 2d 267.