Legal Opinion

Chlystek v. Kane

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided July 29, 1976No. 76-1639PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

ADAMS, Circuit Judge.

This is the third time that the petitioner’s request for the convening of a three-judge court has been before us. Previously, this Court decided that the cause of action involved a “substantial federal question.”1 Now we must determine whether the complaint alleges a basis for granting equitable relief.

A

The petition for summary reversal relates, and the respondents do not deny, the following statement of the case: Adam Chlystek was divorced from his wife on the ground of his adultery. For the last thirty-five years he has lived with Helen Chlystek, the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Maryland Casualty Co. v. Pacific Coal & Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
  2. United States v. KingSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  3. Zwickler v. KootaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. SAMUELS Et Al. v. MACKELL, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF QUEENS COUNTY, Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1971
  5. Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. DanforthSupreme Court of the United States · 1976

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Bonjorno v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1981
  2. Mitchell v. Commission On Adult Entertainment Establishments Of The State Of DelawareCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
  3. Mitchell v. Commission on Adult Entertainment Establishments of DelawareCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
  4. Pine Township Citizens' Ass'n v. ArnoldDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1978
  5. Chlystek v. KaneCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API