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.
Holmes et al. v. City of Atlanta et al., 1955 — 350 U.S. 879 · caselaw · US
General
Holmes et al. v. City of Atlanta et al.
350 U.S. 879·Supreme Court of the United States·1955
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. 396.
Holmes et al. v. City of Atlanta et al.
Robert L. Carter, Thurgood Marshall and E. E. Moore for petitioners. J. C. Murphy and Henry L. Bowden for respondents.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Per Curiam:
The petition for writ of certiorari is granted, the judgments both of the Court of Appeals and the District Court are vacated and the case is remanded to the District Court with directions to enter a decree for petitioners in conformity with Mayor & City Council of Baltimore City v. Dawson, ante, p. 877, decided this day.