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.

Rosario v. Rockefeller

Citations: 406 U.S. 957; 92 S. Ct. 2062Docket: No. 71-1371

Court: Supreme Court of the United States; May 30, 1972; Federal Supreme Court; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The motion filed by the lawyers for McGovern to submit an amicus curiae brief has been granted. The Court has granted certiorari but denied the motion for summary reversal or, alternatively, for expedited consideration on the merits. Justice Stewart expressed a desire to expedite consideration on the merits. An application for a stay, presented to Justice Marshall and referred to the Court, has been denied. However, Justices Douglas, Brennan, Stewart, and Marshall would have granted the stay.

Legal Issues Addressed

Amicus Curiae Brief Submission

Application: The court granted the motion for the submission of an amicus curiae brief by McGovern's lawyers, allowing third-party input into the case.

Reasoning: The motion filed by the lawyers for McGovern to submit an amicus curiae brief has been granted.

Certiorari Granted

Application: The court accepted the case for review by granting certiorari, indicating that the legal issues presented are significant enough to warrant the Court's attention.

Reasoning: The Court has granted certiorari but denied the motion for summary reversal or, alternatively, for expedited consideration on the merits.

Denial of Summary Reversal and Expedited Consideration

Application: The court denied the motion for summary reversal and expedited consideration, opting not to fast-track the case resolution.

Reasoning: The Court has granted certiorari but denied the motion for summary reversal or, alternatively, for expedited consideration on the merits.

Dissent in Stay Decision

Application: Justices Douglas, Brennan, Stewart, and Marshall expressed a different opinion, indicating they would have preferred to grant the stay.

Reasoning: However, Justices Douglas, Brennan, Stewart, and Marshall would have granted the stay.

Stay Application Denial

Application: The application for a stay was denied, meaning the court did not halt proceedings or actions related to the case during its review.

Reasoning: An application for a stay, presented to Justice Marshall and referred to the Court, has been denied.