Legal Opinion
Hinnant v. Sebesta
District Court, M.D. Florida
Decided August 14, 1972No. Civ. 72-440, 72-443PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
HODGES, District Judge.
On February 10, 1972, following argument of the case before a three-judge panel, my colleagues held in Woodsum v. Boyd, 341 F.Supp. 448 (M.D.Fla.1972), that the durational residency requirements of Florida Statute 97.041, F.S.A., (1971) were unconstitutional under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. At that time the Florida law specified a minimum residency of one year in the state and six months in the county as a prerequisite to registration as an elector. Relying primarily upon Kramer v. Union Free School District No. 15, 395…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Dunn v. BlumsteinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Kramer v. Union Free School District No. 15Supreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Samuel Bailey v. Joe T. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Hadnott v. AmosDistrict Court, M.D. Alabama · 1970
- Electronic Industries Ass'n v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Reed v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1974
- Hinnant v. SebestaDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · 1973
- Meyers v. JacksonDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1975
- Jim Fair and Jim Hinnant, Both Individually and as Representative of the Class of Similarly Situated Residents of of the State of Florida v. Jim Sebesta, as Supervisor of Elections, Hillsborough County, Florida, Etc., Joel Francis Woodman, Individually, and Joel Francis Woodman, as Representative of the Class, Etc. v. James Sebesta, Supervisor of Elections, Hillsborough County, FloridaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
- Fair v. SebestaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973