Supreme Court of the United States, 1967

Corinth Publications, Inc. v. Wesberry

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided June 12, 1967 · Clark, Roth, Massachusetts

388 U.S. 448; 87 S. Ct. 2096; 18 L. Ed. 2d 1310; 1967 U.S. LEXIS 1098 (United States Reports)

Counsel

Stanley Fleishman for petitioner., Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General of Georgia, and G. Ernest Tidwell, Executive Assistant Attorney General, for respondents.

Cases that cite this one

15 later published cases cite this decision.

State v. Hoyt (Minn. 1970)
People v. Billingsley (Mich. Ct. App. 1969)
United States v. New Orleans Book Mart, Inc. (United States District Court Eastern District of Louisiana 1971)
City of Chicago v. Geraci (Ill. 1970)
Poulos v. Rucker (United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama 1968)
Leon J. Grant and Walter F. Wissman v. United States (9th Cir. 1967)
State v. Carlson (Minn. 1972)
State v. Hoelscher (Minn. 1972)
City of Chicago v. Geraci (Ill. 1970)
Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. City of Dallas (Supreme Court of the United States 1968)
Commonwealth v. Dell Publications, Inc. (Pa. 1967)
Kaplan v. California (Supreme Court of the United States 1973)
People v. Mature Enterprises, Inc. (Criminal Court of the City of New York 1973)
Kaplan v. California (Supreme Court of the United States 1973)
People v. Kirkpatrick (Criminal Court of the City of New York 1970)

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.

The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment of the Supreme Court of Georgia is reversed.

The Chief Justice would grant the petition and set the case for oral argument. Mr. Justice Clark would grant the petition and affirm. Mr. Justice Harlan adheres to the views expressed in his separate opinions in Roth v. United States, 354 U. S. 476, 496, and Memoirs v. Massachusetts, 383 U. S. 413, 455, and on the basis of the reasoning set forth therein would affirm.

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