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.
BOARD OF SATANTA JOINT RURAL HIGH SCHOOL, DISTRICT NO. 2, et al. v. HASKELL COUNTY PLANNING BOARD et al., 1966 — 385 U.S. 96 · caselaw · US
General
BOARD OF SATANTA JOINT RURAL HIGH SCHOOL, DISTRICT NO. 2, et al. v. HASKELL COUNTY PLANNING BOARD et al.
385 U.S. 96·Supreme Court of the United States·1966
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
BOARD OF SATANTA JOINT RURAL HIGH SCHOOL, DISTRICT NO. 2, et al. v. HASKELL COUNTY PLANNING BOARD et al.
No. 560.
Decided November 14, 1966.
Dale M. Stucky for appellants.
Robert C. Londerholm, Attorney General of Kansas, and J. Richard Foth, Assistant Attorney General, for appellees.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.