McSurely v. Ratliff
Supreme Court of the United States
1Per curiam
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The stay heretofore granted, post, p. 914, is continued for 30 days in order to afford the appellants an opportunity to apply to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit for a stay. If such timely application is made, the stay entered by this Court shall remain in effect until the Court of Appeals acts on that application.
Mr. Justice Black and Mr. Justice Douglas are of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted and the case set for oral argument.
2Cited by11 opinions
- Alan McSurely v. John L. McClellan Thomas Ratliff, Individually and as Sometime Commonwealth Attorney for Pike County, KentuckyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1982
- Alan McSurely and Margaret McSurely v. John J. McClellanCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1976
- Alan McSurely and Margaret McSurely v. John K. McClellan Thomas Ratliff, Individually and as Sometime Commonwealth Attorney for Pike County KentuckyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1985
- Sovereign News Co. v. FalkeDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1977
- Board of Education v. Department of Health, EducationDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1975
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.