Legal Opinion

Kopald v. Carr

District Court, M.D. Tennessee

Decided May 22, 1972No. Civ. A. 6576PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Per curiam

This court is called upon to rule on a challenge to the most recent statutory reapportionment of the General Assembly of Tenessee. It is asserted that this legislation violates the “one-man, one-vote” Constitutional mandate. See e. g. Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 82 S. Ct. 691, 7 L.Ed.2d 663 (1962).

Each of the challenged statutes 1 includes a principal plan, and an alternative plan to be effective in the event that the principal plan is held to be unconstitutional. Defendants concede that both principal plans are unconstitutional. They urge that the alternative plans, corrected for obvious…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Baker v. CarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Reynolds v. SimsSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  3. Swann v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Scott v. GermanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  5. Sixty-Seventh Minnesota State Senate v. BeensSupreme Court of the United States · 1972

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Gentry Crowell, Secretary of State of Tennessee v. Richard MaderSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  2. State Ex Rel. Lockert v. CrowellTennessee Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Mader v. CrowellDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1980
  4. White v. CrowellDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 1977
  5. Sullivan v. CrowellDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 1978

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

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

Powered by the Exa API