Search Supreme Court Cases
FORTSON v. MORRIS - 385 U.S. 955 (1966)
U.S. Supreme Court
FORTSON v. MORRIS , 385 U.S. 955 (1966)
385 U.S. 955
Ben W. FORTSON, Secretary of State of State of Georgia, appellant,
John MORRIS et al.
Supreme Court of the United States
November 21, 1966
Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen. of Georgia, G. Earnest Tidwell, Executive Asst. Atty. Gen., Harold N. Hill, Jr., and Coy R. Johnson, Asst. Attys. Gen., Gerald H. Cohen and Alexander Cocalis, Deputy Asst. Attys. Gen., for applicant.
Charles Morgan, Jr., for Morris and others.
Emmet J. Bondurant II, Francis Shackelford and Randolph W. Thrower, for Justice and others.
A notice of appeal having been filed in the above case from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, and an application for a stay of that judgment pending disposition of the appeal having been presented to Mr. Justice Black, and by him referred to the Court under Rule 50(6), the stay is granted, pending the issuance of the judgment of this Court.
All of the parties to the proceeding having requested acceleration of the appeal, the following schedule for further proceedings is adopted: The appellant shall perfect his appeal, file a statement as to jurisdiction, the certified record and his brief on the merits on or before Friday, November 25, 1966. The appellees shall file such motions under Rule 16(1) as they desire and their briefs on the merits, also on November 25, 1966. Reply briefs by all parties may be filed on or before December 2, 1966. The Court will hear argument on all matters involved on December 5, 1966. The case will be heard on the typewritten record, but any of the parties may print as appendices to their briefs such portions of the record as they desire. The statement as to jurisdiction, motions and briefs may be submitted in typewritten form and printed copies substituted thereafter.[ Fortson v. Morris 385 U.S. 955 (1966) ]
Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.