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.
Samuels et al. v. Mackell, District Attorney of Queens County, et al.; and Fernandez v. Mackell, District Attorney of Queens County, et al., 1969 — 393 U.S. 1073 · caselaw · US
General
Samuels et al. v. Mackell, District Attorney of Queens County, et al.; and Fernandez v. Mackell, District Attorney of Queens County, et al.
393 U.S. 1073·Supreme Court of the United States·1969
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. 580.
No. 813.
Samuels et al. v. Mackell, District Attorney of Queens County, et al.; and Fernandez v. Mackell, District Attorney of Queens County, et al.
Thomas J. Mackell, pro se, on the motion.
Victor Rabinowitz for appellants in No. 580 in opposition.
[MAJORITY]
Appeals from D. C. S. D. N. Y. [Probable jurisdiction noted, ante, p. 975.] Motion of appellee Mackell to require certification of additional record denied.