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.
Colegrove et al. v. Barrett, Secretary of State of Illinois, et al., 1947 — 330 U.S. 804 · caselaw · US
General
Colegrove et al. v. Barrett, Secretary of State of Illinois, et al.
330 U.S. 804·Supreme Court of the United States·1947
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. 1031.
Colegrove et al. v. Barrett, Secretary of State of Illinois, et al.
March 10, 1947.
Urban A. Lavery for appellants. George F. Barrett, Attorney General of Illinois, and William C. Wines, Assistant Attorney General, for appellees.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question. In view of the Court's refusal to grant rehearing in Colegrove v. Green, 328 U. S. 549, rehearing denied, 329 U. S. 825, 828, and its dismissal of the appeals in Cook v. Fortson and Turman v. Duckworth, 329 U. S. 675, rehearing denied, 329 U. S. 829, Mr. Justice Rutledge concurs in the dismissal of this appeal. Mr. Justice Black, Mr. Justice Douglas, and Mr. Justice Murphy are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.