You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

SCHLESINGER Et Al. v. HOLTZMAN Et Al.

Citation: 414 U.S. 1321Docket: A-175

Court: Supreme Court of the United States; October 26, 1973; Federal Supreme Court; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

This case involves a complex procedural dispute regarding stays of court orders within the United States judicial system. It centers on a series of legal maneuvers beginning with the District Court for the Eastern District of New York issuing an order on July 25, 1973. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit subsequently imposed a stay on this order on July 27, 1973, which Mr. Justice Marshall, serving as Circuit Justice, declined to vacate on August 1, 1973. However, on August 2, Mr. Justice Douglas vacated the stay, reinstating the District Court's order. The Solicitor General's subsequent request for another stay prompted Justice Marshall to act directly. Although typically a Circuit Justice would defer to the Court of Appeals, the unique circumstances led him to stay the District Court’s order pending further Supreme Court action. The Court of Appeals, recognizing the urgency, expedited its hearing date to August 8, 1973, underscoring the procedural fluidity and judicial discretion employed in this case. The outcome reflects the dynamic interplay between different levels of the federal judiciary and the strategic use of judicial stays in managing ongoing litigation.

Legal Issues Addressed

Authority of Circuit Justice

Application: The Circuit Justice has the authority to address orders from lower courts when the Court of Appeals has already acted.

Reasoning: Mr. Justice Marshall noted that typically a Circuit Justice would wait for the Court of Appeals to act on a District Court order; however, given the current circumstances where the Court of Appeals has already acted, he directly addressed the District Court's order.

Procedural Expediency in Judicial Review

Application: The Court of Appeals expedited a hearing to address the merits of the case, demonstrating procedural expediency.

Reasoning: The Court of Appeals had initially expedited a hearing on the merits for August 13, 1973, which was further advanced to August 8, 1973.

Stay of Court Orders

Application: A stay can be vacated or imposed by different justices, affecting the status of lower court orders.

Reasoning: Mr. Justice Douglas vacated the stay ordered by the Court of Appeals, effectively reinstating the District Court's order.