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.
In re Northern, 1978 — 434 U.S. 1090 · caselaw · US
General
In re Northern
434 U.S. 1090·Supreme Court of the United States·1978
The Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Blackmun dissent and would grant the stay.
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
February 22, 1978
No. A-695.
In re Northern.
[MAJORITY]
This application for stay of the mandate of the Tennessee Court of Appeals, Middle Section, was presented to Mr. Justice Stewart as Circuit Justice on February 16, 1978, and referred by him to the Conference. Whereupon the Court requested the State to file an expedited response to the application by noon, February 21, 1978. The response was received in due course and a special conference was called to consider the matter. It is hereby ordered that the application be denied.
The Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Blackmun dissent and would grant the stay.