Narrative Opinion Summary
The motion to dismiss the appeal is granted due to a lack of a substantial federal question. The Court has refused to grant rehearing in the case of Colegrove v. Green, and has also dismissed appeals in Cook v. Fortson and Turman v. Duckworth, with rehearings denied in those cases as well. Justice Rutledge concurs with the dismissal. Conversely, Justices Black, Douglas, and Murphy believe that probable jurisdiction should be acknowledged.
Legal Issues Addressed
Dismissal of Appeal for Lack of Substantial Federal Questionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court grants dismissal of the appeal because it does not present a substantial federal question.
Reasoning: The motion to dismiss the appeal is granted due to a lack of a substantial federal question.
Judicial Concurrence and Dissent in Appeal Dismissalsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Justice Rutledge concurs with the decision to dismiss the appeal, whereas Justices Black, Douglas, and Murphy dissent, believing that probable jurisdiction should be recognized.
Reasoning: Justice Rutledge concurs with the dismissal. Conversely, Justices Black, Douglas, and Murphy believe that probable jurisdiction should be acknowledged.
Refusal to Grant Rehearing in Judicial Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Court has declined to grant rehearing in the precedent case of Colegrove v. Green and similar cases.
Reasoning: The Court has refused to grant rehearing in the case of Colegrove v. Green, and has also dismissed appeals in Cook v. Fortson and Turman v. Duckworth, with rehearings denied in those cases as well.