Peters v. Hobby
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Warren
This action was instituted by petitioner in the District Court for the District of Columbia. The principal relief sought is a declaration that petitioner’s removal and debarment from federal employment were invalid. Prior to trial, the District Court granted the respondents’ motion for judgment on the pleadings. The judgment was affirmed, one judge dissenting, by the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, relying on its decision in Bailey v. Richardson, 86 U. S. App. D. C. 248, 182 P. 2d 46, sustained here by an equally divided vote, 341 U. S. 918. We granted certiorari, 348…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee v. McGrathSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Wieman v. UpdegraffSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- United States v. LovettSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Proprietors of the Charles River Bridge v. Proprietors of the Warren BridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1837
- Addison v. Holly Hill Fruit Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by235 opinions
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Paul v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Udall v. TallmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Green v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Greene v. McElroySupreme Court of the United States · 1959
230 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.