Contracts · MBE-tested
HUDGINS v. CALIFORNIA
386 U.S. 265·Supreme Court of the United States·1967
Mr. Justice Stewart is of the opinion that certiorari should be denied because the petition was not timely filed.
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
HUDGINS v. CALIFORNIA.
No. 37,
Mise.
Decided March 13, 1967.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for further consideration in light of Chapman v. California, ante, p. 18.
Mr. Justice Stewart is of the opinion that certiorari should be denied because the petition was not timely filed.