Contracts · MBE-tested
DREWS et al. v. MARYLAND
378 U.S. 54712 L. Ed. 2d 1032·Supreme Court of the United States·1964
Mr. Justice Douglas would reverse outright on the basis of the views expressed in his opinion in Bell v. Maryland, ante, p. 242. · Mr. Justice Black, Mr. Justice Harlan and Mr. Justice White dissent.
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
DREWS et al. v. MARYLAND.
No. 3.
Decided June 22, 1964.
Robert B. Watts, Francis D. Murnaghan, Jr. and Jack Greenberg for appellants.
Thomas B. Finan, Attorney General of Maryland, and Joseph S. Kaufman, Deputy Attorney General, for appellee.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals of Maryland for consideration in light of Griffin v. Maryland, ante, p. 130, and Bell v. Maryland, ante, p. 226.
Mr. Justice Douglas would reverse outright on the basis of the views expressed in his opinion in Bell v. Maryland, ante, p. 242.
Mr. Justice Black, Mr. Justice Harlan and Mr. Justice White dissent.