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.
COOPER v. PATE, WARDEN, 1964 — 378 U.S. 546 · caselaw · US
General
COOPER v. PATE, WARDEN
378 U.S. 54612 L. Ed. 2d 1030·Supreme Court of the United States·1964
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
COOPER v. PATE, WARDEN.
No. 1134, Misc.
Decided June 22, 1964.
Alex Elson and Bernard Weisberg for petitioner.
William G. Clark, Attorney General of Illinois, and Raymond S. Sarnow and Edward A. Berman, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
[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 petitioner, an inmate at the Illinois State Penitentiary, brought an action under 28 U. S. C. § 1343 and 42 U. S. C. § 1983, § 1979 of the Revised Statutes, alleging that solely because of his religious beliefs he was denied permission to purchase certain religious publications and denied other privileges enjoyed by other prisoners. The District Court granted the respondent’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted and the Court of Appeals affirmed. 324 F. 2d 165 (C. A. 7th Cir.). We reverse the judgment below. Taking as true the allegations of the complaint, as they must be on a motion to dismiss, the complaint stated a cause of action and it was error to dismiss it. See Pierce v. LaVallee, 293 F. 2d 233 (C. A. 2d Cir.); Sewell v. Pegelow, 291 F. 2d 196 (C. A. 4th Cir.).