Supreme Court of the United States, 1967

Schackman v. Arnebergh

Schackman v. Arnebergh
Supreme Court of the United States · Decided May 29, 1967 · Per Curiam
387 U.S. 427; 18 L. Ed. 2d 865; 87 S. Ct. 1622; 1967 U.S. LEXIS 1332 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Burton Marks for appellants., Roger Arnebergh, pro se, Bourke Jones and Robert B. Burns for appellees Arnebergh et al.; Harold W. Kennedy, George Wakefield and Martin E. Weekes for appellees Younger et al.; and Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, pro se, and A. Barry Cappello, Deputy Attorney General, for appellee Lynch.

Schackman v. Arnebergh

Cases that cite this one

66 later published cases cite this decision. The 24 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 seek review by this Court of the refusal by the District Court to convene a three-judge District Court pursuant to 28 U. S. C. §§ 2281-2284. We have held that such review is available in the Court of Appeals, Idlewild Bon Voyage Liquor Corp. v. Epstein, 370 U. S. 713, and not in this Court. Buchanan v. Rhodes, 385 U. S. 3.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

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