General
NEW YORK FEED CO., INC., et al. v. LEARY et al.
397 U.S. 98·Supreme Court of the United States·1970
Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the cases set for oral argument.
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
NEW YORK FEED CO., INC., et al. v. LEARY et al.
No. 992.
Decided February 27, 1970
Herald Price Fahringer for appellants in No. 992. Ralph J. Schwarz, Jr., and Albert B. Gerber for appellants in No. 998.
J. Lee Rankin and Stanley Buchsbaum for appellee Leary in both cases, and Frank S. Hógan, pro se, and Michael R. Juviler for appellee Hogan in both cases. Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, pro se, Samuel A. Hirshowitz, First Assistant Attorney General, and Charles A. La Torella, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, filed a motion to dismiss or affirm for the Attorney General of New York.
Together with No. 998, Milky Way Productions, Inc., et al. v. Leary et al., also on appeal from the same court.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motions to affirm are granted and the judgments are affirmed.
Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the cases set for oral argument.