Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Supreme Court of the United States, 1950

Shipman v. DuPre

Shipman v. DuPre
Supreme Court of the United States · Decided June 5, 1950 · Douglas
339 U.S. 321; 70 S. Ct. 640; 94 L. Ed. 2d 877; 1950 U.S. LEXIS 2071 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Aaron Kravitch, Phyllis Kravitch and Joseph From-berg for appellants., John M. Daniel, Attorney General of South Carolina, T. C. Callison and R. Hoke Robinson, Assistant Attorneys General, for appellees.

Shipman v. DuPre

Cases that cite this one

59 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appellants sought a declaratory judgment that certain sections of the South Carolina statute regulating the fisheries and shrimping industry were unconstitutional, and interlocutory and permanent injunctions restraining the state officials from carrying out those provisions. The *322 statutory three-judge District Court assumed jurisdiction, decided the issues on the merits, and dismissed the complaint. 88 F. Supp. 482. From the papers submitted on appeal, it does not appear that the statutory sections in question have as yet been construed by the state courts. We are therefore of opinion that the District Court erred in disposing of the complaint on the merits. See American Federation of Labor v. Watson, 327 U. S. 582, 595-599.

The judgment of the District Court is vacated and the cause is remanded to that court with directions to retain jurisdiction of the complaint for a reasonable time, to afford appellants an opportunity to obtain, by appropriate proceedings, a construction by the state court of the statutory provisions involved.

Mr. Justice Douglas dissents.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.