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.
RIVAS et al. v. COZENS, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES OF CALIFORNIA, et al., 1972 — 409 U.S. 55 · caselaw · US
General
RIVAS et al. v. COZENS, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES OF CALIFORNIA, et al.
409 U.S. 55·Supreme Court of the United States·1972
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
RIVAS et al. v. COZENS, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES OF CALIFORNIA, et al.
No. 71-5780.
Decided November 13, 1972
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The appellants’ supplemental brief filed October 14, 1972, recites:
“The California Supreme Court’s decision in Rios [v. Cozens, 7 Cal. 3d 792, 499 P. 2d 979 (1972),] has been given full prospective and retroactive effect. Cal. Sup. Ct. Order Denying Stay Pending Appeal, filed August 30, 1972. Accordingly, the individual petitioners herein, Celestino V. Rivas and Zeferino Samaniego, have now been accorded the opportunity for a personal evidentiary hearing regarding the suspension of their driver’s licenses.”
Accordingly the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted, the judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to determine whether this case has become moot.