text:
    No. 703.
    Barber v. Page, Warden.
   C. A. 10th Cir. (Certiorari granted, ante, p. 819.) Motion of petitioner for appointment of counsel granted. It is ordered that Ira C. Rothgerber, Jr., Esquire, of Denver, Colorado, a member of the Bar of this Court, be, and he is hereby, appointed to serve as counsel for petitioner in this case.


source: Caselaw Access Project

license: Public Domain

text:
    No. 168,
    Misc.
    Elliott, Administrator v. Sierzenga et al.
   Motion for leave to file petition for writ of certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 424,
    Misc.
    Cully v. Pennsylvania.
   Motion for leave to file petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.


text:
    No. 482.
    United States v. Johnson et al.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Door and David L. Norman for the United States.
   Appeal from D. C. N. D. Ga. Probable jurisdiction noted.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.


text:
    No. 478.
    Amalgamated Food Employees Union Local 590 et al. v. Logan Valley Plaza, Inc., et al.

      Lester Asher and Bernard Dunau for petitioners.

      Robert Lewis for respondents.
   Sup. Ct. Pa. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 363.
    No. 428.
    United States et al. v. Southwestern Cable Co. et al.; and Midwest Television, Inc., et al. v. Southwestern Cable Co. et al.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Ralph S. Spritzer, Howard E. Shapiro, Henry Getter and Daniel R. Ohl-baum for the United States et al. in No. 363.

      Ernest W. Jennes and Charles A. Miller for petitioners in No. 428.

      Morton H. Wilner, Arthur Scheiner and Harold F. Reis for Southwestern Cable Co., and Frank U. Fletcher, Robert L. Heald and Edward F. Kenehan for Mission Cable TV, Inc., et al., respondents in both cases.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari granted. Cases are consolidated and two hours are allotted for oral argument.

Mr. Justice Douglas and Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of these petitions.

Reported below: 378 F. 2d 118.


text:
    No. 486.
    Stern v. South Chester Tube Co.

      David Freeman and Richard H. Weis for petitioner.

      Richard P. Brown, Jr., and Ralph Earle II for respondent.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 465.
    Edwards v. Pacific Fruit Express Co.

      David S. Levinson for petitioner.

      Alan C. Furth for respondent.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 344.
    Mensik et ux. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

      Kinsey T. James for petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Rogovin and Carolyn R. Just for respondent.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 434.
    Aeronautical Radio, Inc. v. National Mediation Board et al.

      Charles R. Cutler for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Acting Assistant Attorney General Eardley and John C. Eldridge for the National Mediation Board, and David Previant and Herbert S. Thatcher for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, respondents.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 458.
    England v. United States.

      George T. Williams for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Rogovin and Joseph M. Howard for the United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 461.
    Hardy Salt Co. v. Illinois et al.

      John L. Davidson, Jr., for petitioner.

      William G. Clark, Attorney General of Illinois, C. Donald Robertson, Attorney General of West Virginia, and Lee A. Freeman for respondents.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 459.
    Airdo v. United States.

      Charles A. Bellows for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 462.
    Fain et al. v. Duncan.

      Cecil D. Branstetter for petitioners.

      Maclin P. Davis, Jr., for respondent.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 464.
    Biazevich et al., dba M. V. Liberator, et al. v. National Labor Relations Board.

      Stanley E. Tobin and Carl M. Gould for Boat Owners and Individuals, and Robert W. Gilbert for Seine & Line Fishermen’s. Union of San Pedro, petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli and Norton J. Come for respondent.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 466.
    Diesel Tanker, A. C. Dodge, Inc. v. Stewart et al.

      Christopher E. Heckman for petitioner.

      Wilbur H. Hecht for respondents.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 469.
    Coastal Petroleum Co. v. Kirk, Governor of Florida, et al.

      Frank Bezoni, C. Dean Reasoner and E. Tillman Stirling for petitioner.

      Earl Faircloth, Attorney General of Florida, and T. T. Turnbull, Assistant Attorney General, for respondents.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 477.
    Morrill v. Freeman, Secretary of Agriculture, et al.

      Farland Robbins for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Acting Assistant Attorney General Eardley, Morton Hollander and Robert V. Zener for respondents.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 476.
    Davis et al., Executors v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

      Arthur A. Armstrong for petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer and Assistant Attorney General Rogovin for respondent.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 484.
    Carbone et al. v. United States.

      Albert J. Krieger and Robert Kasanof for petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Philip R. Monahan for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 406,
    Misc.
    Harris v. Kentucky.
   Ct. App. Ky. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 487.
    Americana Corp. v. Haber et al.

      Henry E. Kappler for petitioner.

      Howard I. Friedman for respondents.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 80,
    Misc.
    Thomas v. Pate, Warden.

      William G. Clark, Attorney General of Illinois, and John J. O’Toole and Donald J. Veverka, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 273,
    Misc.
    Chatterton v. Dutton, Warden.

      David L. Lomenick for petitioner.

      Arthur K. Bolton, Attorney General of Georgia, G. Ernest Tidwell, Executive Assistant Attorney General, and Marion 0. Gordon, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Ga. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 307,
    Misc.
    Garrison v. California.

      Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, William E. lames, Assistant Attorney General, and Ronald M. George, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 397,
    Misc.
    Cosby v. United States.

      Robert A. Maloney for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Philip R. Monahan for the United States.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 399,
    Misc.
    Woodard v. United States.

      Richard S. T. Marsh and Donald B. Robertson for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Robert G. Maysack for the United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 485.
    Goff v. Goff.

      Marvin Brooks Norfleet for petitioner.

      Tom P. Mitchell for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Tenn. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 423,
    Misc.
    Crepeault v. Vermont.

      James L. Oakes, Attorney General of Vermont, and Alan W. Cheever and Prank G. Mahady, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Vt. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 431,
    Misc.
    Irons v. Pennsylvania.
   Sup. Ct. Pa. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 436,
    Misc.
    Haney v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 485,
    Misc.
    Anderson v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 469,
    Misc.
    McLaughlin v. Massachusetts.

      F. Lee Bailey for petitioner.

      Elliot L. Richardson, Attorney General of Massachusetts, and Willie J. Davis, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   Sup. Jud. Ct. Mass. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 452,
    Misc.
    Gilday v. Massachusetts.

      John Kuttas for petitioner.

      John P. S. Burke for respondent.
   Sup. Jud. Ct. Mass. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 486,
    Misc.
    Kerry v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 488,
    Misc.
    Reed v. Wainwright, Corrections Director.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 499,
    Misc.
    Sosa et al. v. California.

      Caryl Warner for petitioners.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 521,
    Misc.
    Lewis v. Ohio.

      James R. Willis for petitioner.

      John T. Corrigan for respondent.
   Ct. App. Ohio, 8th Jud. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 621,
    Misc.
    Creighton v. New York.

      Anthony F. Marra for petitioner.

      Frank S. Hogan, H. Richard Uviller and Michael Juviler for respondent.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 1st Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 507,
    Misc.
    Jackson v. Wilson, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 456.
    National Labor Relations Board v. Bata Shoe Co., Inc., et al.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli and Norton J. Come for petitioner.

      Madeline Balk and Frederick T. Gray for Bata Shoe Co., Inc., and Joseph L. Rauh, Jr., and John Silard for United Shoe Workers of America, AFL-CIO, respondents.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 165,
    Misc.
    Barnes et al. v. United States.

      David O. Belew, Jr., for petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 214,
    Misc.
    Thomas v. United States.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Mervyn Hamburg for the United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 244,
    Misc.
    Pettett v. United States.

      Paul W. Steer and J ames J. Ryan for petitioner.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Sidney M. Glazer for the United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 341,
    Misc.
    Daniel v. United States.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Robert G. Maysack for the United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 448,
    Misc.
    White v. United States.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


author: Mr. Justice Stewart,

text:
    No. 91.
    Fort v. City of Miami.

      Irma Robbins Feder and Richard Yale Feder for petitioner.

      Jack R. Rice, Jr., for respondent.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 3d Dist. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Stewart,

with whom Mr. Justice Black and Mr. Justice Douglas join,

dissenting.

The petitioner created six fiberglass statues which he offered for sale in his backyard. Two police officers approached his home, confiscated the statues, and arrested him for violating a municipal ordinance that prohibits the knowing possession of obscene figures or images for sale.

The petitioner was convicted, his conviction was affirmed, and the Florida District Court of Appeal denied certiorari. Unable to obtain review in any higher Florida court, he brought to this Court the federal constitutional claims he had unsuccessfully advanced at every stage of the state litigation.

It is clear that the ordinance under which he was convicted is unconstitutional on its face. That ordinance adopts the definition of obscenity embodied in a Florida statute:

“For the purposes of this section, the test of whether or not material is obscene is: Whether to the average person, applying contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of the material taken as a whole appeals to prurient interest.”

Members of this Court have expressed differing views as to the extent of a State’s power to suppress “obscene” material through criminal or civil proceedings. But it is at least established that a State is without power to do so upon the sole ground that the material “appeals to prurient interest.”

The petitioner in this case was charged, tried, and convicted under a statutory provision which contains no other criterion of “obscenity.” This conviction therefore rests upon a law incompatible with the guarantees of the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.

I would grant the petition for certiorari and reverse the judgment.

       Section 38 of Chapter 43 of the Miami Code provides that it shall be unlawful for any person to commit an act which is recognized by the laws of the State as a misdemeanor. Under c. 61-7, Laws 1961, Fla. Stat. §847.011 (l)(a), it is a misdemeanor to have in one’s “possession, custody, or control with intent to sell . . . any obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, indecent, [or] immoral . . . figure [or] image.”

       The Florida Supreme Court may review by certiorari a decision of a district court of appeal “in direct conflict with a decision of another district court of appeal or of the supreme court on the same point of law.” Fla. Const., Art. V, § 4 (2); Fla. App. R. 4.5c (6). Although the State suggests that the petitioner might have invoked this “conflict jurisdiction” in order to obtain review of his conviction in the Florida Supreme Court, the petitioner states that no Florida decision of which he is aware conflicts with that of the District Court of Appeal, and the State’s response to the petition for certiorari refers to no decision that even purports to pass upon the issues here involved. Under these circumstances, I am satisfied that the judgment of the District Court of Appeal in this ease was “rendered by the highest court-of a State in which a decision could be had,” as required by 28 U. S. C. § 1257.

       Chapter 61-7, Laws 1961; Fla. Stat. §847.011 (10).

       The “prurient interest” language of the Florida statute may be traced to a sentence in this Court’s opinion in Roth v. United States, 354 U. S. 476, 489. That language, however, cannot be taken to establish a constitutionally sufficient “test” of obscenity. The prevailing opinion by Mr. Justice Brennan in Memoirs v. Massachusetts, 383 U. S. 413, recognized that a State may not suppress matter as “obscene” unless “ (a) the dominant theme of the material taken as a whole appeals to a prurient interest in sex; (b) the ma--terial is patently offensive because it affronts contemporary community standards relating to the description or representation of sexual matters; and (c) the material is utterly without redeeming social value,” stressing that the “three elements must coalesce.” 383 U. S., at 418. Mr. Justice White dissented in that case, nonetheless expressing the opinion that a legislature is not free to ban works of art or literature “simply because they deal with sex or because they appeal to the prurient interest.” Id., at 462. See Redrup v. New York, 386 U. S. 767.


text:
    No. 436.
    Schlinsky v. United States.

      David M. Scheffer for petitioner.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Rogovin and Joseph M. Howard for the United States.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas and Mr. Justice Fortas are of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    No. 442.
    Feaster et al. v. United States.

      MacDonald Gallion, Attorney General of Alabama, and Willis C. Darby, Jr., for petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for the United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.


text:
    No. 198,
    Misc.
    Lawrence v. Texas.

      Sam Houston Clinton, Jr., for petitioner.

      Crawford C. Martin, Attorney General of Texas, George M. Cowden, First Assistant Attorney General, R. L. Lattimore, Howard M. Fender and Lonny F. Zwiener, Assistant Attorneys General, and A. J. Carubbi, Jr., for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Tex. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas, Mr. Justice Brennan and Mr. Justice Stewart are of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.


author: Mr. Justice Fortas,

text:
    No. 30,
    Misc.
    Hamilton v. California.

      Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, and Edsel W. Haws and Daniel J. Kremer, Deputy Attorneys General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Fortas,

with whom Mr. Justice Douglas and Mr. Justice Marshall join,

dissenting.

While petitioner was in custody on a murder charge, he sent a note to an inspector in the District Attorney’s office requesting a meeting. The inspector met petitioner in a room on the mezzanine of the county jail. Faced with a possible death penalty, petitioner said he would give some information “if he were allowed to plead guilty [before a certain judge] and receive a life sentence.” The inspector testified and recounted this offer of compromise to the jury.

Before the inspector’s evidence was introduced, but while the inspector was on the stand, petitioner asked for an offer of proof by the prosecutor out of the jury’s presence. The request was denied. Immediately after the inspector told about the offer to plead guilty, petitioner moved to strike the evidence. The motion was denied.

It is not uncommon for defendants or their lawyers to negotiate with prosecutors about pleading guilty. It is entirely possible that, in the hopelessness and loneliness of jail, faced with a charge of murder, a prisoner may discuss a bargain-deal with the prosecutor even if he is not guilty of the offense. In any event, the defendant’s attempt to negotiate may well be accepted by the jury as a convincing admission of guilt. There is, in reality, no way in which the jury can be persuaded that the ugly inference of guilt is not to be drawn from his statement, however equivocal may have been his intent in making it. Usually, the accused cannot take the stand to explain the circumstances without peril.

We should consider whether we should not, in any event, prohibit the use of a statement made for bargaining purposes. We should not attach such a penalty to discussion of the possibility of a guilty plea. The general rule is that such evidence would not be admissible in a civil suit even where the stake is as little as a few dollars. We should at least consider the bearing of the practice upon the constitutional guarantee of a fair trial where the issue is murder and the possible penalty is death.

There is another important issue here. Although the prosecutor used the offer to plead guilty as he would have used a confession, there was no separate hearing on the question of voluntariness. Nor did the trial judge make a specific finding that the statement was voluntary. I think we should consider whether the procedure outlined in Jackson v. Denno, 378 U. S. 368 (1964), and Sims v. Georgia, 385 U. S. 538 (1967), was required in this case.

       Petitioner was charged with two counts of murder. At his first trial he was sentenced to death on both counts. The California Supreme Court reversed the conviction. People v. Hamilton, 65 Cal. 2d 881, 362 P. 2d 473 (1961). At his second trial he was found guilty on both counts again and sentenced to death on one and life imprisonment on the other. The California Supreme Court upheld the conviction and the life sentence but reversed the death penalty. People v. Hamilton, 60 Cal. 2d 105, 383 P. 2d 412 (1963). Subsequently, petitioner was sentenced to life imprisonment on both counts. He filed two petitions for habeas corpus in the California Supreme Court. Both were denied without opinion. This petition for certiorari seeks review of the second denial.

       At a subsequent point in the trial, petitioner’s counsel read to the jury a transcript of an interrogation of petitioner by the police, conducted on the night he was apprehended. In his statement petitioner said he was going to “plead guilt” but that he “never intended to kill neither one of them.” The California Supreme Court did not refer to this statement or rely upon it in determining that the admission of petitioner’s offer to plead guilty made to the inspector almost three months later was harmless error.

       4 Wigmore, Evidence §§ 1061-1062 (3d ed. 1940). See also Fed. Rule Civ. Proe. 68 and 7 Moore, Federal Practice §§68.01-68.06 (1966).

       The California Supreme Court agreed that petitioner’s offer to plead guilty was inadmissible by analogy with a provision of the California Code making inadmissible evidence of guilty pleas which were withdrawn. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court held that this was “harmless error” because it thought a different result would not have been “reasonably probable” without the error. Therefore the conviction was not reversed. People v. Hamilton, 60 Cal. 2d, at 112-114, 119-121, 383 P. 2d, at 415-416, 420-421. The admission of the evidence here in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment would be critically important to the trial, and the error could not be considered harmless under the standards announced by the Court in Chapman v. California, 386 U. S. 18 (1967).


text:
    No. 452.
    Martin Marietta Corp. v. Federal Trade Commission.

      Terrence C. Sheehy and Clark C. Vogel for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Irwin A. Seibel, James Mcl. Henderson and Charles C. Moore, Jr., for respondent.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.


text:
    No. 301,
    Misc.
    Bailey v. DeQuevedo.

      Peter O. Clauss for petitioner.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Acting Assistant Attorney General Eardley, John C. Eldridge and Robert V. Zener for respondent.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.

. Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    No. 479.
    Hilton Hotels (U. K.) Ltd. v. Frummer.

      Sidney H. Willner for petitioner.

      Irving A. Scheinberg for respondent.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied.

The Chief Justice took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    October 30, 1967.
    No. 588,
    Misc.
    Yates v. Peyton, Penitentiary Superintendent.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Petition for writ of certiorari dismissed October 30,1967, pursuant to Rule 60 of the Rules of this Court.


text:
    November 6, 1967.
    No. 498.
    Colorado River Water Conservation District et al. v. Four Counties Water Users Association et al.
   Sup. Ct. Colo. The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this order.


text:
    No. 882,
    Misc.
    In re Disbarment of Powell.
   It is ordered that Diana Kearny Powell of Washington, District of Columbia, be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within forty days, requiring her to show cause why she should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. 548.
    Snohomish County v. Seattle Disposal Co. et al.
   Sup. Ct. Wash. The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.


text:
    No. 580,
    No. 595,
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Saunders v. Kropp, Warden; and Woollaston v. Pennsylvania.
   Motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus denied.


text:
    No. 528.
    Berguido et al., Executors v. Eastern Airlines, Inc.

      B. Nathaniel Richter and Seymour I. Toll on the motion.

      Owen B. Rhoads, F. Hastings Griffin, Jr., Daniel L. Stonebridge and John J. Martin for respondent in opposition.

      Theodore E. Wolcott for respondents in No. 70
    in opposition.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Motion of petitioners for consolidation with Alitalia-Linee Aeree Itáliane, S. p. A. v. Lisi et al., No. 70 (see post, p. 926) denied.


text:
    No. 508.
    Levy, Administratrix v. Louisiana Through the Charity Hospital of Louisiana at New Orleans Board of Administrators et al.

      Norman Dorsen, Adolph J. Levy, Lawrence J. Smith and Melvin L. Wulf for appellant.

      Jack P. F. Gremillion, Attorney-General of Louisiana, and William A. Porteous, Jr., for appellees.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. La. Probable jurisdiction noted.


text:
    No. 510.
    Pickering v. Board of Education of Township High School District 205, Will County.
   Appeal from Sup. Ct. Ill. Probable jurisdiction noted. Case set for oral argument immediately following No. 325 (see cunte, p. 818).


text:
    No. 70.
    Alitalia-Linee Aeree Italiane, S. p. A. v. Lisi et al.

      Austin P. Mag-ner and George N. Tompkins, Jr., for petitioner.

      Theodore E. Wolcott for respondents.

      Harold L. Warner, Jr., Carl S. Rowe and Paul G. Pennoyer, Jr., for International Air Transport Association, John E. Stephen and Joseph F. Healy, Jr., for Air Transport Association of America, Alfred C. Clapp for Republic of Italy, and Edwin Long-cope for United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, as amici curiae, in support of the petition.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Acting Assistant Attorney General Eardley, J. Nicholas McGrath, Jr., Morton Hollander and Richard S. Salzman for the United States, as amicus curiae, in opposition to the petition.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Motions of International Air Transport Association, Air Transport Association of America, Republic of Italy, and United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for leave to file briefs, as amici curiae, granted. Certiorari granted.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of these motions and petition.


text:
    No. 497.
    Hanner v. DeMarcus et ux.

      Philip M. Haggerty for petitioner.

      Robert John Walton for respondents.
   Sup. Ct. Ariz. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 492.
    Heffelman v. Udall, Secretary of the Interior.

      Jess Larson for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Weisl and Roger P. Marquis for respondent.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 298.
    Male v. Florida.

      Earl Faircloth, Attorney General of Florida, and Wallace E. Allbritton, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 472.
    Watson v. Gulf Stevedore Corp.

      Bill Allen for petitioner.

      Carl 0. Bue, Jr., for respondent.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 474.
    No. 571.
    Gordon v. United States; and Scata v. United States.

      Morris Berick for petitioner in No. 474, and W. Paul Flynn for petitioner in No. 571.

      Solicitor General Griswold, Ralph S. Spxitzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States in both cases.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.

Reported below: 379 F. 2d 788.


text:
    No. 488.
    Bay et al. v. Mecom, Trustee, et al.

      Joseph W. Cash for petitioners.

      G. Kibby Munson for respondents.
   Sup. Ct. Tex. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 490.
    Lee v. Ritsch et al.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 499.
    Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. et al.

      Francis M. Shea, Richard T. Conway, James R. Wolfe and Charles I. Hopkins, Jr., for St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co., and Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Acting Assistant Attorney General Eardley and John C. Eldridge for Seward, respondents.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 493.
    Origoni v. Bulletin Co., Inc.

      Michael F. X. Dolan for petitioner.

      William J. Curtin and John R. McConnell for respondent.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 494.
    Carnes v. Georgia.

      Charles Robinson for petitioner.
   Ct. App. Ga. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 495.
    Wright v. Immigration and Naturalization Service.

      Thomas C. Binkley for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for respondent.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 500.
    No. 501.
    Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. et al.; and Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Co. et al.

      John H. Haley, Jr., Milton Kramer and Clifton Hildebrand for petitioner in No. 500.

      David Leo Uelmen and Mr. Kramer for petitioner in No. 501.

      Francis M. Shea, Richard T. Conway, James R. Wolfe, Charles I. Hopkins, Jr., and Robert W. Yost for Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. et al., and Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Acting Assistant Attorney General Eardley and John C. Eldridge for Seward et al., respondents in No. 500. Messrs. Shea, Conway, Wolfe, Hopkins and James P. Reedy for respondent Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Co. in No. 501.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.

Reported below: 127 U. S. App. D. C. 58, 380 F. 2d 605.


text:
    No. 521.
    Hooper v. Ohio.

      Allan Sherry for petitioner.
   Sup. Ct. Ohio. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 505.
    Wolcoff et al. v. United States.

      Anna R. Lavin for petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 506.
    Comtel Corp. et al. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

      George G. Tyler for petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Rogovin, Crombie J. D. Garrett and Elmer J. Kelsey for respondent.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 507.
    Buckley et al. v. United States.

      Julius Lucius Echeles for petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 509.
    In re Stecker.

      M. Gene Haeberle for petitioner.

      A. Morton Shapiro for the State of New Jersey.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 512.
    Pioneer Plastics Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board.

      V-ernon C. Stoneman for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli and Norton J. Come for respondent.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 514.
    McCarty v. United States.

      Maria Louisa Green for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Mervyn Hamburg for the United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 519.
    Miller et al. v. United States.

      Max Cohen for' petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for the United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 524.
    Corrington v. Webb, Administrator, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, et al.

      Herbert M. Ansell for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for respondents.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 527.
    Aho v. United States.

      Charles R. Maloney for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for the United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 529.
    Protection Mutual Insurance Co. v. Planters Manufacturing Co.

      Ronald A. Jacks for petitioner.

      William H. Maynard for respondent.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 535.
    Marchese et al. v. United States.

      Burton Marks for Márchese, and Russell E. Parsons for Del Bono, petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Kirby W. Patterson for the United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 537.
    Local 1291, International Longshoremen's Association v. National Labor Relations Board et al.

      Abraham E. Freedman and Martin J. Vigderman for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli and Norton J. Come for respondent National Labor Relations Board.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 530.
    Francosteel Corp. v. N. V. Nederlandsch Amerikaansche, Stoomvart-Maatschappij.

      Lyman Henry for petitioner.

      R. Frederic Fisher for respondent.
   Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 531.
    Bessenyey v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

      Orrin G. Judd and Earle K. Moore for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer and Assistant Attorney General Rogovin for respondent.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 533.
    Rifkin Textiles Corp. v. United States.

      Menahem Stim and Allen S. Stim for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for the United States.
   C. C. P. A. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 536.
    Preston Corp. et al. v. Raese.

      William H. Arkin for petitioners.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 538.
    Carter v. Florida.

      Errol S. Wittes for petitioner.

      Earl Faircloth, Attorney General of Florida, and Fred T. Gallagher, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 4th Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 540.
    United States v. Ingham, Executrix, et al.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Carl Eard-ley, John C. Eldridge and Richard S. Salzman for the United States.

      Lee S. Kreindler for Ingham, and John J. Martin for Eastern Air Lines, Inc., respondents.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    No. 541.
    Davenport v. United States.

      Norman D. Lane for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for the United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 543.
    Detroit Edison Co. et al. v. East China Township School District No. 3 et al.

      Harvey Fischer, Richard Ford, P. W. McQuillen and P. M. Brown for petitioners.

      Richard B. Gushee for respondents.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 545.
    Grain Elevator, Flour & Feed Mill Workers, International Longshoremen Association, Local 418, AFL-CIO v. National Labor Relations Board.

      Henry Kaiser, George Kaufmann, Ronald Rosenberg, Irving M. Friedman and Harold A. Katz for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli, Norton J. Come, Solomon I. Hirsh and Eugene B. Granof for respondent.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 547.
    Northwest Engineering Co. v. National Labor Relations Board et al.

      Walter S. Davis for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli and Norton J. Come for National Labor Relations Board, and Bernard Kleiman, Elliot Bredhoff, Michael Gottesmcm and George Cohen for United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO, respondents.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 549.
    Siegelson v. New York.

      Fred Queller and Robert L. Cohen for petitioner.

      Frank S. Hogan and Michael Juviler for respondent.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 550.
    Simpson v. California.

      Vincent P. DiGiorgio for petitioner.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 551.
    Texas v. Central Power & Light Co.

      Crawford C. Martin, Attorney General of Texas, George M. Cowden, First Assistant Attorney General, J. C. Davis and W. 0. Shultz II, Assistant Attorneys General, and A. J. Carubbi, Jr., for petitioner.

      H. K. Howard for respondent.

      Arthur J. Sills, Attorney General, Aim B. Handler, First Assistant Attorney General, and Elias Abelson and William J. Walsh, Deputy Attorneys General, for the State of New Jersey, as amicus curiae, in support of the petition.
   Ct. Civ. App. Tex., 13th Sup. Jud. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 552.
    Zimmer v. Kansas.

      Melvin L. Wulf and Elwaine F. Pomeroy for petitioner.

      Robert C. Londerholm, Attorney General of Kansas, Richard H. Seaton, Assistant Attorney General, and Robert D. Hecht for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Kan. Certio-rari denied.


text:
    No. 620.
    Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Co. et al.

      David Leo Uelman and Milton Kramer for petitioner.

      Francis M. Shea, Richard T. Conway, Benjamin W. Boley, James R. Wolfe, Charles I. Hopkins, Jr., and James P. Reedy for respondent Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Co., and Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for respondent Seward.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 480,
    Misc.
    Ebell v. McGee, Administrator, et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


author: Mr. Justice Stewart, Mr. Justice Douglas,

text:
    No. 401.
    Mora et al. v. McNamara, Secretary of Defense, et al.

      Stanley Faulkner and Selma W. Samols for petitioners.

      Solicitor General Marshall for respondents.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Mr. Justice Stewart,

with whom Mr. Justice Douglas joins,

dissenting.

The petitioners were drafted into the United States Army in late 1965, and six months later were ordered to a West Coast replacement station for shipment to Vietnam. They brought this suit to prevent the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Army from carrying out those orders, and requested a declaratory judgment that the present United States military activity in Vietnam is “illegal.” The District Court dismissed the suit, and the Court of Appeals affirmed.

There exist in this case questions of great magnitude. Some are akin to those referred to by Mr. Justice Douglas in Mitchell v. United States, 386 U. S. 972. But there are others:

I.Is the present United States military activity in Vietnam a “war” within the meaning of Article I, Section 8, Clause 11, of the Constitution?
II.If so, may the Executive constitutionally order the petitioners to participate in that military activity, when no war has been declared by the Congress?
III. Of what relevance to Question II are the present treaty obligations of the United States?
IV. Of what relevance to Question II is the Joint Congressional (“Tonkin Gulf”) Resolution of August 10, 1964?
Do present United States military operations fall within the terms of the Joint Resolution? (a)
If the Joint Resolution purports to give the Chief Executive authority to commit United States forces to armed conflict limited in scope only by his own absolute discretion, is the Resolution a constitutionally impermissible delegation of all or part of Congress’ power to declare war? (b)

These are large and deeply troubling questions. Whether the Court would ultimately reach them depends, of course, upon the resolution of serious preliminary issues of justiciability. We cannot make these problems go away simply by refusing to hear the case of three obscure Army privates. I intimate not even tentative views upon any of these matters, but I think the Court should squarely face them by granting certiorari and setting this case for oral argument.

Mr. Justice Douglas,

with whom Mr. Justice Stewart concurs,

dissenting.

The questions posed by Mr. Justice Stewart cover the wide range of problems which the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations recently explored, in connection with the SEATO Treaty of February 19, 1955, and the Tonkin Gulf Resolution.

Mr. Katzenbach, representing the Administration, testified that he did not regard the Tonkin Gulf Resolution to be “a declaration of war” and that while the Resolution was not “constitutionally necessary” it was “politically, from an international viewpoint and from a domestic viewpoint, extremely important.” He added:

“The use of the phrase ‘to declare war’ as it was used in the Constitution of the United States had a particular meaning in terms of the events and the practices which existed at the time it was adopted ....
“[I]t was recognized by the Founding Fathers that the President might have to take emergency action to protect the security of the United States, but that if there was going to be another use of the armed forces of the United States, that was a decision which Congress should check the Executive on, which Congress should support. It was for that reason that the phrase was inserted in the Constitution.
“Now, over a long period of time, . . . there have been many uses of the military forces of the United States for a variety of purposes without a congressional declaration of war. But it would be fair to say that most of these were relatively minor uses of force ....
“A declaration of war would not, I think, correctly reflect the very limited objectives of the United States with respect to Vietnam. It would not correctly reflect our efforts there, what we are trying to do, the reasons why we are there, to use an outmoded phraseology, to declare war.”

The view that Congress was intended to play a more active role in the initiation and conduct of war than the above statements might suggest has been espoused by Senator Fulbright (Cong. Rec., Oct. 11, 1967, pp. 14683-14690), quoting Thomas Jefferson who said:

“We have already given in example one effectual check to the Dog of war by transferring the power of letting him loose from the Executive to the Legislative body, from those who are to spend to those who are to pay.”

These opposed views are reflected in the Prise Cases, 2 Black 635, a five-to-four decision rendered in 1863. Mr. Justice Grier, writing for the majority, emphasized the arguments for strong presidential powers. Mr. Justice Nelson, writing for the minority of four, read the Constitution more strictly, emphasizing that what is war in actuality may not constitute war in the constitutional sense. During all subsequent periods in our history— through the Spanish-American War, the Boxer Rebellion, two World Wars, Korea, and now Vietnam — the two points of view urged in the Prise Cases have continued to be voiced.

A host of problems is raised. Does the President’s authority to repel invasions and quiet insurrections, do his powers in foreign relations and his duty to execute faithfully the laws of the United States, including its treaties, justify what has been threatened of petitioners? What is the relevancy of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and the yearly appropriations in support of the Vietnam effort?

The London Treaty (59 Stat. 1546), the SEATO Treaty (6 U. S. T. 81, 1955), the Kellogg-Briand Pact (46 Stat. 2343), and Article 39 of Chapter VII of the UN Charter deal with various aspects of wars of “aggression.”

Do any of them embrace hostilities in Vietnam, or give rights to individuals affected to complain, or in other respects give rise to justiciable controversies?

There are other treaties or declarations that could be cited. Perhaps all of them are wide of the mark. There are sentences in our opinions which, detached from their context, indicate that what is happening is none of our business:

“Certainly it is not the function of the Judiciary to entertain private litigation — even by a citizen— which challenges the legality, the wisdom, or the propriety of the Commander-in-Chief in sending our armed forces abroad or to any particular region.” Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U. S. 763, 789.

We do not, of course, sit as a committee of oversight or supervision. What resolutions the President asks and what the Congress provides are not our concern. With respect to the Federal Government, we sit only to decide actual cases or controversies within judicial cognizance that arise as a result of what the Congress or the President or a judge does or attempts to do to a person or his property.

In Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2, the Court relieved a person of the death penalty imposed by a military tribunal, holding that only a civilian court had power to try him for the offense charged. Speaking of the purpose of the Founders in providing constitutional guarantees, the Court said:

“They knew . . . the nation they were founding, be its existence short or long, would be involved in war; how often or how long continued, human foresight could not tell; and that unlimited power, wherever lodged at such a time, was especially hazardous to freemen. For this, and other equally weighty reasons, they secured the inheritance they had fought to maintain, by incorporating in a written constitution the safeguards which time had proved were essential to its preservation. Not one of these safeguards can the President, or Congress, or the Judiciary disturb, except the one concerning the writ of habeas corpus.’' Id., 125.

The fact that the political branches are responsible for the threat to petitioners’ liberty is not decisive. As Mr. Justice Holmes said in Nixon v. Herndon, 273 U. S. 536, 540:

“The objection that the subject matter of the suit is political is little more than a play upon words. Of course the petition concerns political action but it alleges and seeks to recover for private damage. That private damage may be caused by such political action and may be recovered for in a suit at law hardly has been doubted for over two hundred years, since Ashby v. White, 2 Ld. Raym. 938, 3 id. 320, and has been recognized by this Court.”

These petitioners should be told whether their case is beyond judicial cognizance. If it is not, we should then reach the merits of their claims, on which I intimate no views whatsoever.

       Hearings on S. Res. No. 151, 90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967).

       [1955] 6 U. S. T. 81, T. I. A. S. No. 3170.

       78 Stat. 384.

       Hearings on S. Res. No. 151, supra, n. 1, at 87.

         Id., at 145.

         Id., at 80-81.

       15 Papers of Jefferson 397 (Boyd ed., Princeton 1958). In The Federalist No. 69, at 465 (Cooke ed. 1961), Hamilton stated:
      “[T]he President is to be Commander in Chief of the army and navy of the United States. In this respect his authority would be nominally the same with that of the King of Great-Britain, but in substance much inferior to it. It would amount to nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces, as first General and Admiral of the confederacy; while that of the British King extends to the declaring of war and to the raising and regulating of fleets and armies; all which by the Constitution under consideration would appertain to the Legislature.”


text:
    No. 513.
    Granza et al. v. United States.

      Clyde W. Woody and Marian S. Rosen for petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Motion to dispense with printing petition granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 496.
    Wien Alaska Airlines, Inc. v. United States.

      Phillip D. Bostwick and Lawrence R. Schneider for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Acting Assistant Attorney General Eardley and Morton Hollander for the United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Stewart is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.


text:
    No. 502.
    Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis.

      John H. Haley, Jr., Milton Kramer and Clifton Hildebrand for petitioner.

      Francis M. Shea, Richard T. Conway, Ralph J. Moore, Jr., James R. Wolfe and Charles I. Hopkins, Jr., for respondent.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.

The Chief Justice is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.


text:
    No. 532.
    Welch v. American President Lines, Ltd.

      Martin J. Jarvis for petitioner.

      Graydon S. Staring for respondent.

      Paul S. Edelman for American Trial Lawyers Association, Admiralty Section, as amicus curiae, in support of the petition.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Motion of American Trial Lawyers Association, Admiralty Section, for leave to file a brief, as amicus curiae, granted. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 402,
    Misc.
    Hackathorn v. Decker, Sheriff.

      Fred S. Abney for petitioner.

      Henry Wade for respondent.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 473,
    Misc.
    Barone v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 544.
    Mouton, Collector of Revenue of Louisiana, et al. v. United States et al.

      Chapman L. Sanford and Emmett E. Batson for petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Rogovin and Harold C. Wilkenfeld for the United States, and Eugene D. Saunders for Chrysler Corp., respondents.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    No. 542.
    Hayes v. City of Columbus.

      James C. Britt for petitioner.

      Alba L. Whiteside for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Ohio. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Fortas dissents for the reasons stated in his dissent from the denial of certiorari in Heller v. Connecticut, ante, p. 902.


text:
    No. 28,
    Misc.
    Bradshaw v. Mississippi.

      W. S. Moore for petitioner.

      Joe T. Patterson, Attorney General of Mississippi, and G. Garland Lyell, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Miss. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 73,
    Misc.
    Tarrance v. Louisiana.

      Jack P. F. Gremillion, Attorney General of Louisiana, and William P. Schuler, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. La. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 294,
    Misc.
    Denman et al. v. Wertz et al.

      David Stahl and Robert E. Bauer for respondent Schoettle et al., and Maurice Louik and Craig T. Stockdale for respondent Brown.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 481,
    Misc.
    Brunette v. Anderson, Judge.
   Dist. Ct. Idaho, 6th Jud. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 305,
    Misc.
    Tahl v. California.

      Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, William E. James, Assistant Attorney General, and Ronald M. George, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 437,
    Misc.
    Wooten v. United States.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Jerome M. Feit for the United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 475,
    Misc.
    Hisquierdo v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 4th App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 477,
    Misc.
    Farley v. United States.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 483,
    Misc.
    Myles v. Nelson, Warden.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 484,
    Misc.
    Elliott v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 490,
    Misc.
    Nawrocki v. Michigan.
   Sup. Ct. Mich. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 496,
    Misc.
    Posey v. Beto, Corrections Director.
   Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 497,
    Misc.
    Tatreau v. Nebraska.
   Sup. Ct. Neb. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 506,
    Misc.
    Adams v. Illinois.
   Sup. Ct. Ill. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 509,
    Misc.
    Martinez v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 512,
    Misc.
    Kulis v. Mancusi, Warden.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 519,
    Misc.
    Lewis v. California.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 525,
    Misc.
    Aguilar v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No 533,
    Misc.
    Brown v. Swenson, Warden.
   Sup. Ct. Mo. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 536,
    Misc.
    Perry v. United States.

      Leon B. Polsky and Phylis Skloot Bamberger for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 545,
    Misc.
    Seiterle v. Nelson, Warden.

      Earl Klein for petitioner.

      Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, William E. James, Assistant Attorney General, and Norman H. Sokolow, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 583,
    Misc.
    Pool v. Leone, dba Dominic Leone Construction Co., et al.

      Michael A. Williams for petitioner.

      John C. Mott for respondents.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 538,
    Misc.
    Dento v. United States.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for the United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 574,
    Misc.
    Bilotti et al. v. United States.

      H. Elliot Wales for Bilotti and Albert H. Buschmann for Wasser, petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Jerome M. Feit for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 556,
    Misc.
    Dovico v. United States.

      F. Lee Bailey for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Jerome M. Feit for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    No. 467,
    Misc.
    Rubio v. Immigration and Naturalization Service.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for respondent.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.


text:
    No. 295,
    Misc.
    O’Brien v. United States.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Mervyn Hamburg for the United States.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    No. 534,
    Misc.
    Mendoza v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 4th App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 619,
    Misc.
    Reid et al. v. West Virginia.
   Sup. Ct. App. W. Va. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 635,
    Misc.
    Garcia v. New York.

      Frank S. Hogan and Michael Juviler for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. N. Y., New York County. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 555,
    Misc.
    Noland v. United States.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for the United States.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 640,
    Misc.
    McCharen v. L & A Construction Co. et al.

      Dixon L. Pyles for petitioner.
   Sup. Ct. Miss. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 602,
    Misc.
    Platts v. United States.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Jerome M. Feit and Robert G. Maysack for the United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 671,
    Misc.
    Banks v. Ohio.

      Irwin W. Barkan for petitioner.
   Sup. Ct. Ohio. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 7,
    No. 101,
    No. 115,
    No. 125,
    No. 355,
    No. 361,
    No. 476,
    No. 513,
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Collins v. Field, Mens Colony Superintendent, Mears aka Scott v. Nevada, Whisman v. Georgia, Fletcher v. Pennsylvania, Furtak v. New York, Furtak v. New York, Furtak v. McMann, Warden, et al., Furtak v. Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Judicial Department,
   ante, p. 860;

ante, p. 888;

ante, p. 865;

ante, p. 865;

ante, p. 875;

ante, p. 875;

ante, p. 879; and

ante, p. 879. Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 1067,
    October Term, 1966.
    Miller Brewing Co. v. Jones, Director of Revenue of Illinois,
   386 U. S. 684, 387 U. S. 938. Motion for leave to file second petition for rehearing denied.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.


author: Mr. Justice Harlan,

text:
    November 9, 1967.
    Nos. 778, 779, 830-836.
    Penn-Central Merger and N & W Inclusion Cases.
   Appeal from D. C. S. D. N. Y.

Applications for a stay of enforcement of an order of the Interstate Commerce Commission authorizing a merger of the Pennsylvania R. Co. and the New York Central R. Co., pending this Court’s determination of appeals from a decision of a three-judge court in the Southern District of New York, 279 F. Supp. 316, sustaining both the Commission’s order authorizing the merger and its order directing the Norfolk & Western R. Co. to include in its system the Erie-Laekawanna R. Co., the Delaware & Hudson R. Corp., and the Boston & Maine Corp., have been submitted to Mr. Justice Harlan as the Associate Justice assigned to the Second Circuit. The applicants for a stay include four railroad companies, holders of New York, New Haven & Hartford R. Co. bonds, a Pennsylvania city, and a Pennsylvania R. Co. stockholder.

Mr. Justice Harlan,

pursuant to our Rule 50 (6), has referred these applications to the Court for disposition. Papers supporting the stay applications have been submitted by the Delaware & Hudson R. Corp. and the Erie-Lackawanna R. Co. In addition, the Baltimore & Ohio R. Co. for itself and certain other railroad carriers has docketed an appeal from the part of the Southern District of New York judgment which upheld the Commission’s order authorizing the Penn-Central merger. Similarly, the Norfolk & Western R. Co. has docketed an appeal from that part of the judgment which upheld the order directing it to include in its system the three railroads named above. These appellants have filed a joint motion to accelerate consideration of their appeals. Motions to consolidate and to accelerate consideration of the appeals have been filed by the Delaware & Hudson Corp. and the Erie-Lackawanna R. Co. The United States and the Interstate Commerce Commission and various other parties have indicated that they do not oppose a stay of the merger if consideration of the appeals is substantially accelerated.

Upon consideration of these applications, motions, and other papers, a stay of enforcement of the order of the Interstate Commerce Commission, and the motions to consolidate and accelerate, are hereby granted subject to and in accordance with the following expedited schedule. See Hannah v. Larche, 361 U. S. 910; Erie-Lackawanna R. Co. v. United States, 385 U. S. 914. Any parties to the proceedings below who desire to appeal and have not already done so shall file notices of appeal and shall docket their cases on or before November 17, 1967. Appellants who have filed notices of appeal but who have not perfected such appeals shall docket their cases on or before the same date. Appellees shall file their motions in response to the jurisdictional statements on or before November 27, 1967. Appellants shall file their replies to those motions on or before November 30, 1967. All appeals will be consolidated, and all matters involved are set for oral argument on December 4, 1967, without further exchange of briefs beyond that indicated hereafter. A total of four hours is allotted for argument, with two hours allotted to those supporting the judgment below and two hours to those attacking that judgment. Four attorneys will be permitted to participate in the oral argument on each side, the division of time to be settled among counsel. The case is to be submitted upon the oral arguments, the.jurisdictional papers before the Court, the briefs filed below (copies to be filed in this Court on or before November 20, 1967), and the typewritten record.

Howard J. Trienens, Richard J. Flynn, George L. Saunders, Jr., Lloyd N. Cutler, Daniel K. Mayers, Edward K. Wheeler, Robert B. Claytor, Kenneth H. Ekin, Norman C. Melvin and John S. Shannon for Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. et ah; Myron S. Isaacs and Homer Kripke for Oscar Gruss & Son; Lawrence W. Pollack for New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co. First Mortgage 4% Bondholders Committee and Harvey Gelb, Israel Packel and Gordon P. MacDougall for the City of Scranton and Milton J. Shapp on the Applications for Stay. Messrs. Trienens, Flynn, Sau/nders, Cutler, Mayers and Wheeler and Albert Ritchie for appellants on the Motion to Advance. Harry G. Silleck, Jr., for Delaware & Hudson Railroad Corp., and Thomas D. Barr and Eldon Olson for Erie-Lackawanna Railroad Co. on Motions to Consolidate and to Advance. Solicitor General Griswold and Robert W. Girmane for the United States and the Interstate Commerce Commission; Henry P. Sailer for Pennsylvania Railroad Co. and New York Central Railroad Co.; James A. Belson for Boston & Maine Corp.; Joseph Averbach, James Wm. Moore, Robert W. Blanchette, Arthur Blasberg, Jr., Robert G. Bleakney, Jr., and Morris Raker for Trustees of New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co.; and Samuel Kanell, Special Assistant to the Attorney General of Connecticut, for the States of Connecticut and Rhode Island in response to Applications for Stay and Motions to Advance.

Me. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this matter.

[See 386 U. S. 372.]

       Order of June 9, 1967, 330 I. C, C. 328.

       Order of June 9, 1967, 330 I. C. C. 780, as modified by Order of September 1, 1967, 331 I. C. C. 22.

       Baltimore & Ohio It. Co.; Chesapeake & Ohio R. Co.; Norfolk & Western It. Co.; Western Maryland It. Co.

       Oscar Grass & Son; New York, New Haven & Hartford It. Co. First Mortgage 4% Bondholders Committee.

       City of Scranton.

       Milton J. Shapp, who also appears as a citizen of Pennsylvania.

         Chesapeake & Ohio R. Co.; Norfolk & Western R. Co.; Western Maryland R. Co.

       The Boston & Maine Corp. has also filed a notice of appeal with respect to this part of the judgment.

       Pennsylvania R. Co.; New York Central R. Co.; Boston & Maine Corp.; Trustees of the New York, New Haven & Hartford R. Co.; States of Connecticut- and Rhode Island.


text:
    November 10, 1967.
    No.-.
    McSurely et al. v. Ratliff.

      Arthur Kinoy, William M. Kunstler, Morton Stavis and Dan Jack Combs for applicants.

      Solicitor General Griswold for the United States in opposition.
   The application for emergency relief presented to Mr. Justice Stewart, and by him referred to the Court, granted to the extent that the seized documents shall remain in their present custody pending further proceedings in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky.

This order is conditioned upon the applicants’ presentation, within five days, to such District Court of any objections they may have to the validity of the subpoena duces tecum issued by the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Government Operations of the United States Senate and shall remain in effect pending the ruling of such District Court upon any such objections as may be presented.


text:
    November 13, 1967.
    No. -.
    Stassi v. United States.

      C. Anthony Fri-loux, Jr., on the motion.
   Motion to fix place of custody of petitioner denied.


text:
    No. 63.
    No. 67.
    No. 74.
    Sibron v. New York. Terry et al. v. Ohio. Peters v. New York.

      Jack Greenberg, James M. Nabrit III, Michael Meltsner, Melvyn Zarr and Anthony Amsterdam on the motion.
   Appeal from Ct. App. N. Y. (probable jurisdiction noted, 386 U. S. 954);

Sup. Ct. Ohio (cer-tiorari granted, 387 U. S. 929); and

Appeal from Ct. App. N. Y. (probable jurisdiction noted, 386 U. S. 980). Motion of NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc., for leave to participate in the oral argument, as amicus curiae, denied.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.


text:
    No. 528.
    Berguido et al., Executors v. Eastern Airlines, Inc.
   C. A. 3d Cir. The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief expressing the views of the United States.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this matter.


text:
    No. 90 et al.
    Permian Basin Area Rate Cases.

      Vincent P. McDevitt and Samuel Graff Miller on the motion.
   C. A. 10th Cir. (Certiorari granted, 388 U. S. 906; see also, ante, pp. 805, 817.) Motion of Philadelphia Electric Co. for leave to file brief, as amicus curiae, granted.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.


text:
    No. 694,
    No. 907,
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Muir v. Florida; and Eli v. Nelson, Warden.
   Motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus denied.


text:
    No. 456,
    No. 460,
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Phillips et vir v. Kingsley et al.; and Shea v. United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
   Motions for leave to file petitions for writs of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 546.
    Silver v. United States.

      Carl L. Shipley, Rufus W. Peckham, Jr., and Samuel Resnicoff for petitioner.

      Solicitor General Gris-wold for the United States.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 553.
    Midwest-Raleigh, Inc., et al. v. Eastern Gas & Fuel Associates.

      George B. Mickum III and John E. Nolan, Jr., for petitioners.

      Russell L. Furbee for respondent.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 558.
    Lanfranconi v. Tidewater Oil Co.

      John P. Connarn for petitioner.

      John T. Fey for respondent.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 554.
    United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, Carpenters District Council of Denver & Vicinity, AFL-CIO v. Hensel Phelps Construction Co.

      Wayne D. Williams and Howard E. Erickson for petitioner.

      Charles E. Grover for respondent.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 556.
    McIntyre v. United States.

      Howard B. Lonergan for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Jerome M. Feit for the United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 557.
    V. E. B. Carl Zeiss Jena et al. v. Clark, Attorney General.

      Harry I. Band for petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Acting Assistant Attorney General Eardley and John C. Eldridge for respondent.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 560.
    Winn-Dixie Greenville, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board.

      O. R. T. Bowden for petitioner..

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli and Norton J. Come for respondent.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 573.
    Michunovich, Treasurer of Yellowstone County, et al. v. Western Air Lines, Inc.

      Forrest H. Anderson, Attorney General of Montana, Donald A. Garrity, Assistant Attorney General, and William A. Douglas, Special Assistant Attorney General, for petitioners.

      Art Jardine for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Mont. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 561.
    Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. v. United States.

      Joseph T. McGowan for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Acting Assistant Attorney General Eardley, John C. Eldridge and Robert E. Kopp for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 563.
    Henderson, Executor v. United States.

      Wright Matthews for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Rogovin, Meyer Rothwacks and Elmer J. Kelsey for the United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 565.
    Friedman et al. v. Wallach et al.

      David K. Breed for petitioners.
   Sup. Ct. Mo. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 566.
    Royal American Industries, Inc., et al. v. Murphy et al.

      Robert M. Ervin for petitioners.

      Phillip Goldman for respondents.
   Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 4th Dist. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 569.
    China Union Lines, Ltd. v. States Steamship Co.

      Francis L. Tetreault for petitioner.

      Graydon S. Staring for respondent.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 577.
    Allis v. Allis et al.

      Allen Butler for petitioner.

      Paul Car-rington for respondents.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 578.
    Boswell, Trustee v. Sosebee et al.

      Griffin Smith for petitioner.

      William J. Smith for respondents.
   Sup. Ct. Ark. Certiorari denied.


author: Mr. Chief Justice Warren,

text:
    No. 197.
    Kaplan et al. v. Lehman Brothers et al.

      Anthony Bradley Eben and Peyton Ford for petitioners.

      Hammond E. Chaffetz for respondents Lehman Brothers et al., and John T. Chadwell and Richard M. Keck for respondent New York Stock Exchange.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Mr. Chief Justice Warren,

dissenting.

This is no ordinary case. It is of utmost importance to millions of investors, and concerns practices which have an impact on the entire economy of the Nation. It presents for consideration basic principles of antitrust law not previously decided by this Court, and, consequently, is not controlled by precedent. It comes here without representation of the public interest by an agency charged with enforcement of the antitrust laws.

This case draws into question the legality under the Sherman Act of the practice of the New York Stock Exchange in adopting rules fixing minimum rates for the commissions charged by Exchange members for the purchase and sale of securities on the Exchange. Petitioners brought this action pursuant to § 4 of the Clayton Act, 38 Stat. 731, 15 U. S. C. § 15, derivatively on behalf of five mutual fund investment companies of which they are shareholders and representatively on behalf of other shareholders against the New York Stock Exchange and five of its member firms-. Their complaint charges that the practice of the Exchange in fixing minimum commission rates for transactions in securities listed on the Exchange constitutes a price-fixing conspiracy under § 1 of the Sherman Act, 26 Stat. 209, as amended, 15 U. S. C. § 1. They sought treble damages, a declaratory judgment, and an injunction, the effect of which would be to restrain the Exchange from interfering with the rights of individual Exchange members to set their own competitive rates of commission. The District Court granted summary judgment for the Exchange and member firms. The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed.

Members of the New York Stock Exchange transact over 90% of all brokerage business in stocks in the United States. Based on the current trading volume, the investing public is now paying over $1,200,000,000 annually, at the uniform minimum rate, for the privilege of trading on the Exchange. More than 12,000,000 persons own shares listed on the Exchange. Mutual investment funds pay about $100,000,000 annually in commissions to trade on the Exchange, and over 3,000,000 persons own shares in mutual funds.

Only members can trade on the New York Stock Exchange, and its constitution severely limits membership. Exchange rules set uniform minimum commission rates to be charged by members for transactions on the Exchange. The same commission rate is charged, based on the value of the round lot (100 shares), for each transaction regardless of size; the commission on an order for 10,000 shares is 100 times that on an order for 100 shares. Exchange rules prohibit any “member, allied member, member firm or member corporation” from making “a proposition for the transaction of business at less than the minimum rates of commission.” Before a member is allowed trading privileges he must sign a pledge to abide by the constitution and rules of the Exchange, and any member or allied member adjudged guilty of violating the constitution or a rule may be suspended or expelled by the Board of Governors.

This Court has long held that rates fixed by agreement are unreasonable per se. United States v. National Assn. of Real Estate Boards, 339 U. S. 485, 489 (1950); United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 310 U. S. 150, 218 (1940); United States v. Trenton Potteries Co., 273 U. S. 392, 396-398 (1927). Therefore, the Exchange practice here attacked, just as that in Silver v. New York Stock Exchange, 373 U. S. 341 (1963), would, “had it occurred in a context free from other federal regulation, constitute a per se violation of § 1 of the Sherman Act.” Id., at 347. Here, as in Silver, the other federal regulatory scheme is the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the clear question presented is whether there is anything “built into the regulatory scheme which performs the antitrust function . . . .” Id., at 358.

Section 19 (b) of the Securities Exchange Act, 48 Stat. 898, 15 U. S. C. § 78s (b), authorizes the SEC by certain procedures “to alter or supplement the rules” of the Exchange “in respect of such matters as . . . (9) the fixing of reasonable rates of commission . . . .” Respondents contend that this provision sufficiently demonstrates the SEC performs a supervisory function in respect of the Exchange’s rate-fixing to exempt the practice from review under the antitrust laws. Petitioners claim that for many reasons fhe possibility of SEC review is an insufficient substitute for application of the antitrust laws. For example, the SEC’s review of rates is discretionary. Further, the regulatory scheme fails specifically to enjoin the SEC, in determining what rates axe reasonable, to “enforce the competitive standard,” United States v. Philadelphia National Bank, 374 U. S. 321, 351 (1963), and furthermore neither the SEC nor the Exchange has ever articulated any standard of reasonableness. Petitioners also claim that the underlying data used by the SEC in reviewing each of the five rate increases since 1934 have been essentially those supplied by the Exchange, and have been very limited in scope and content. Finally, they claim that if and when the SEC exercises its discretion to review rates, it is not required to hold a hearing, and because the matter is committed to the SEC’s discretion, there is no effective judicial remedy to require it to initiate a rate proceeding.

If, as petitioners claim, the regulatory scheme provides no assurance that antitrust policy will be implemented, perhaps a repeal of the antitrust law may be implied “if necessary to make the Securities Exchange Act work, and even then only to the minimum extent necessary.” Silver v. New York Stock Exchange, supra, at 357. However, “[rjepeals of the antitrust laws by implication from a regulatory statute are strongly disfavored.” United States v. Philadelphia National Bank, supra, at 350. Moreover, petitioners claim that nothing about the Securities Exchange Act or the workings of the Exchange requires that the Exchange set minimum rates.

The court below, in a two-page opinion, held that a repeal of the antitrust laws was required to make the Securities Exchange Act work, and that “the self-regulatory function of the exchange has been exercised by virtue of § 19 (b),” 371 F. 2d, at 411. In my view, this blunderbuss approach falls far short of the close analysis and delicate weighing process mandated by this Court’s opinion in Silver.

The importance of the New York Stock Exchange in the functioning and livelihood of this Nation cannot be gainsaid. Ever-increasing millions of persons and billions of dollars are affected by the Exchange’s practices. Without expressing any final view on the merits of the controversy, I am concerned that the law on this subject is to be permitted to lie where it has aimlessly fallen by virtue of the scanty opinion below. In my judgment, the claims advanced by petitioners raise important questions not only as to the compatibility of the Exchange’s rate-fixing practice with this Nation’s commitment, embodied in the antitrust laws, to competitive pricing, but also as to the fulfillment of the goal of investor protection embodied in the securities laws.

I would grant certiorari and invite the Solicitor General to participate in argument so that the public interest may be fully explored.


text:
    No. 579.
    Ferrell v. Fulton, U. S. District Judge.

      Hilton R. Carr, Jr., Herbert A. Warren, Jr., and E. David Rosen for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Rogovin, Joseph M. Howard and John P. Burke for respondent.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 580.
    Tennessee Packers, Inc., Frosty Morn Division v. National Labor Relations Board.

      George V. Gardner for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Arnold Ord-man, Dominick L. Manoli, Norton J. Come and George B. Driesen for respondent.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 511.
    Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen of America v. Southern Railway Co.

      Charles T. Boyd, Harold C. Heiss and Donald W. Bennett for petitioner.

      Charles A. Horsky for respondent.
   C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.

The Chief- Justice, Mr. Justice Fortas, and Mr. Justice Marshall would grant the writ for the reasons stated in the dissent in Transportation-Communication Employees Union v. Union Pacific R. Co., 385 U. S. 157, 168 (1966).


text:
    No. 641.
    Hall v. National Farmers Organization, Inc.

      William D. Hall, petitioner, pro se.

      Lee D. Sinclair and Alan W. Boyd for respondent.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 582.
    Triple “AAA” Co., Inc., et al. v. Wirtz, Secretary of Labor.

      John B. Ogden for petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Charles Donahue, Bessie Margolin and Robert E. Nagle for respondent.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 564.
    Gearey v. United States.

      Marvin M. Kar-patkin, Rhoda H. Karpatkin, Melvin L. Wulf and Alan H. Levine for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Jerome M. Feit and Ronald L. Gainer for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.


text:
    No. 572.
    Moorman et ux. v. Thomas et al.

      David R. Lewis for petitioners.

      W. Warren Cole, Jr., for respondents.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.


text:
    No. 575.
    National Labor Relations Board v. Purity Food Stores, Inc. (Sav-More Food Stores).

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli and Norton J. Come for petitioner.

      Harold Katz for respondent.
   C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    No. 268,
    Misc.
    Chero v. New York.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 3d Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 316,
    Misc.
    Brown v. Maxwell, Warden.

      John T. Corrigan for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Ohio. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 576.
    Levy v. Corcoran, U. S. District Judge.

      Charles Morgan, Jr., Melvin L. Wulf, Alxm H. Levine, Lawrence Speiser, Ralph J. Temple and Anthony G. Amsterdam for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for respondent.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    No. 609.
    Moist et al. v. Belk, Receiver for Brookdale Cemetery Association, et al.

      August F. Brandt for petitioners.

      A. Albert Sugar for respondent Belk, Arthur M. Lang for respondents Lewis et al., Robert E. Plunkett for respondent Beattie; and Constantine A. Tsangadas, John R. Starrs and Ralph W. McKenney, respondents, pro se.

   C. A. 6th Cir. Motion for security for costs and for supersedeas bond denied. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 16,
    Misc.
    Watson et al. v. Florida.

      Earl Faircloth, Attorney General of Florida, and George R. Georgieff, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 199,
    Misc.
    DeSimone v. United States.

      Frank A. Lopez for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Beatrice Rosenberg and Mer-vyn Hamburg for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 454,
    Misc.
    Schack v. Meadows, U. S. Attorney.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 472,
    Misc.
    Neely v. Cavell, Correctional Superintendent.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 319,
    Misc.
    Stone v. Hall, U. S. District Judge.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for respondent.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 394,
    Misc.
    Cordle v. United States.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for the United States.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 395,
    Misc.
    Woody v. United States.

      Justin B. Wolf for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for the United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 504,
    Misc.
    Gaines v. California.
   Super. Ct. Cal., County of Contra Costa. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 505,
    Misc.
    Thompson v. California et al.
   Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 508,
    Misc.
    Bey v. Pate, Warden.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 510,
    Misc.
    Brunette v. United States.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for the United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 531,
    Misc.
    Realmuto v. Wallack, Warden.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 537,
    Misc.
    Falgout v. Colorado.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 581,
    Misc.
    Johnson v. United States.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for the United States.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 539,
    Misc.
    Gallegoes et al. v. Patterson, Warden.
   C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 544,
    Misc.
    Kenner v. Wayne County Prosecutor et al.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 549,
    Misc.
    Banas v. Wisconsin.
   Sup. Ct. Wis. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 560,
    Misc.
    Ladutko v. Green, Correctional Superintendent.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 561,
    Misc.
    L'Italien v. Massachusetts.

      David B. Kaplan for petitioner.

      John P. S. Burke for respondent.
   Super. Ct. Mass. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 562,
    Misc.
    Weaver v. United States.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 567,
    Misc.
    Fitzgerald v. Oliver, Warden.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 568,
    Misc.
    Stevenson v. United States.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 601,
    Misc.
    Lewis v. United States.

      Sol Zalel Rosen for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for the United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 570,
    Misc.
    Gobie v. Wainwright, Corrections Director.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 571,
    Misc.
    Turner v. California.
   Ct. App. Cal., 2d App. Dist. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 579,
    Misc.
    Tillman v. Oliver, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 582,
    Misc.
    Boles v. Beto, Corrections Director.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 586,
    Misc.
    Huarneck v. New York.

      Frank S. Hogan and Michael Juviler for respondent.
   App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 1st Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 587,
    Misc.
    Diamond v. Rundle, Warden, et al.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 590,
    Misc.
    Farrell v. United States.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg for the United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 598,
    Misc.
    Dorsey v. Nelson, Warden.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 599,
    Misc.
    Knighten v. Field, Mens Colony Superintendent.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 604,
    Misc.
    Schack v. Florida.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 606,
    Misc.
    Stiltner v. Rhay, Penitentiary Superintendent.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 608,
    Misc.
    Saterfield v. California.
   Sup. Ct. Cal. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 609,
    Misc.
    Chero v. New York.
   Ct. App. N. Y. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 266,
    Misc.
    Nelson v. Oregon.

      George Van Hoomissen and Jacob B. Tanzer for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Ore. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Douglas is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.


text:
    No. 379,
    Misc.
    Wilkins et al. v. United States.

      Fred Blanton, Jr., for petitioners.

      Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Doar, Louis F. Claiborne and David L. Norman for the United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    No. 169.
    No. 287.
    No. 362.
    No. 185,
    No. 331,
    No. 372,
    No. 378,
    Kitchen v. Reese et al., Abboud v. Nebraska, Niedziejko et al. v. Board of Fire and Police Commissioners of the City of Milwaukee, Peck v. Toronto et al., Olshen v. McMann, Warden, Lee v. California, Carey v. George Washington University,
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
   ante, p. 850;

ante, p. 848;

ante, p. 848;

ante, p. 868;

ante, p. 874;

ante, p. 876; and

ante, p. 877. Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 427,
    No. 522,
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Salgado v. California, Oughton v. Meier, Warden,
   ante, p. 878; and

ante, p. 808. Petitions for rehearing denied.


text:
    No. 282.
    East Baton Rouge Parish School Board et al. v. Davis et al.,
   ante, p. 840. Petition for rehearing denied.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    December 4, 1967.
    No. 47.
    No. 64.
    Ginsberg v. New York. United Artists Corp. v. City of Dallas.

      Osmond K. Fraenkel, Edward J. Ennis, Melvin L. Wulj and Alan H. Levine for American Civil Liberties Union et al. on the motion urging reversal in both cases.

      Irwin Karp for Authors League of America, Inc., on the motion urging reversal in No. 64.

      N. Alex Bickley and Ted P. MacMaster for the City of Dallas in opposition to the motions in No. 64.
   Appeal from App. Term, Sup. Ct. N. Y., 2d Jud. Dept. (probable jurisdiction noted, 388 U. S. 904); and

Appeal from Ct. Civ. App. Tex., 5th Sup. Jud. Dist. (probable jurisdiction noted, 387 U. S. 903). Motion for leave to file brief of American Civil Liberties Union et al., as amici curiae, granted. Motion of Authors League of America, Inc., for leave to file brief, as amicus curiae, in No. 64 granted.


text:
    No. 995,
    Misc.
    In re Disbarment of Ellis.
   It is ordered that John Flather Ellis of Washington, District of Columbia, be suspended from the practice of law in this Court and that a rule issue, returnable within forty days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.


text:
    No. 133.
    Kolod et al. v. United States,
   ante, p. 834. The Solicitor General is requested to file a response to petition for rehearing within thirty days.

Mb. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this order.


text:
    No. 378.
    No. 661.
    No. 665.
    O’Reilly v. Board of Medical Examiners of the State of California. Allen et al. v. State Board of Elections et al. Paul H. Aschkar & Co. v. Kamen & Co. et al.
   Sup. Ct. Cal.;

Appeal from D. C. E. D. Ya.; and

C. A. 9th Cir.


text:
    No. 726.
    Mathis v. United States.
   C. A. 5th Cir. (Certiorari granted, ante, p. 896.) Motion of petitioner for the appointment of counsel granted. It is ordered that Nicholas J. Capuano, Esquire, of Miami, Florida, a member of the Bar of this Court, be, and he is hereby, appointed to serve as counsel for petitioner in this case.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.


text:
    No. 408,
    Misc.
    Steppe v. Florida.

      Earl Fair cloth, Attorney General of Florida, and Jesse J. Mc-Crary, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
   Motion for leave to file petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.


text:
    No. 690,
    No. 711,
    No. 713,
    No. 741,
    No. 756,
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Misc.
    Blair v. Kropp, Warden; Smith v. Pate, Warden; Bowman v. Rhay, Penitentiary Superintendent, et al.; Bartz v. Florida; and Bailey v. Kropp, Warden.
   Motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus denied.


text:
    No. 75.
    Lee, Corrections Commissioner, et al. v. Washington et al.

      MacDonald Gallion, Attorney General of Alabama, Gordon Madison, Assistant Attorney General, Nicholas S. Hare, Special Assistant Attorney General, for Lee et al., and J. M. Breckenridge for Austin, appellants, on the motion.
   Appeal from D. C. M. D. Ala. Motion of appellants for leave to file supplemental brief after argument granted.

[For earlier order, see 387 U. S. 928.]


text:
    No. 661,
    Misc.
    Boston & Providence Railroad Stockholders Development Group v. United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit et al.

      Armistead B. Rood on the motions.
    Briefs in opposition to the latter motion were filed by James Garfield, James Wm. Moore and Robert W. Blanchette for Smith et al., Trustees of the property of New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad Co.; Robert W. Meserve for Boston & Providence Railroad Corp. Stockholders Committee; Acting Solicitor General Spritzer for the United States; and by Charles Y. Wadsworth for Boston & Providence Railroad Corp.
   (See No. 624, infra, p. 974.) Motion to dispense with printing extra copies of Appendix C to petition granted. Motion for leave to file petition for writ of mandamus denied.


text:
    No. 597.
    United States v. United Shoe Machinery Corp.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Howard E. Shapiro and Margaret H. Brass for the United States.

      Ralph M. Carson, Conrad W. Oberdorfer, Taggart Whipple, Robert D. Salinger and Louis L. Stanton, Jr., for appellee.
   Appeal from D. C. Mass. Probable jurisdiction noted.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.


text:
    No. 600.
    Red Lion Broadcasting Co., Inc., et al. v. Federal Communications Commission et al.

      Roger Robb and H. Donald Kistler for petitioners.

      Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Turner, Henry Getter and Robert D. Hadl for respondents.

      Amicus curiae briefs were filed by Lawrence J. McKay, Raymond L. Falls, Jr., and Thomas E. Ervin for National Broadcasting Co., Inc., and Lloyd N. Cutler, J. Roger Wollen-berg, Timothy B. Dyk, Leon R. Brooks and Herbert Wechsler for Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 154.
    Miller v. California.

      F. Lee Bailey and Alan M. Dershowitz for petitioner.

      Thomas C. Lynch, Attorney General of California, William E. James, Assistant Attorney General, and Philip C. Griffin, Deputy Attorney General, for respondent.
   Ct. App. Cal., 4th App. Dist. Certiorari granted limited to Questions 1 and 2 presented by the petition which read as follows:

“1. Whether the introduction of admissions made to an undercover agent planted in petitioner’s jail cell constituted a violation of petitioner’s constitutional rights to counsel and against self-incrimination.

“2. Whether inculpatory admissions, obtained under circumstances like those here involved, can ever constitute harmless error.”


text:
    No. 645.
    Jones et ux. v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. et al.

      Sol Rabkin, Joseph B. Robison, Robert L. Carter and Paul Hartman for petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Doar, Louis F. Claiborne and Richard A. Posner for the United States, as amicus curiae, in support of the petition.
   C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari granted.


text:
    No. 616.
    Joint Industry Board of the Electrical Industry et al. v. United States.

      Harold Stern for petitioners.

      Solicitor General Griswold, Acting Assistant Attorney General Pugh and Crombie J. D. Garrett for the United States.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Cer-tiorari granted.


text:
    No. 563,
    Misc.
    Harrison v. United States.

      Alfred V. J. Prather for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Jerome M. Feit for the United States.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis granted. Certiorari granted and case transferred to appellate docket.


text:
    No. 639.
    Glona v. American Guarantee & Liability Insurance Co. et al.

      Benjamin E. Smith for petitioner.

      Frank S. Normann for respondents.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari granted and case set for oral argument immediately following No. 508 (see ante, p. 925).


text:
    No. 618.
    Fortnightly Corp. v. United Artists Television, Inc.

      Robert C. Barnard, R. Michael Duncan and E. Stratford Smith for petitioner.

      Louis Nizer, Gerald Meyer and Lawrence S. Lesser for respondent.

      Bruce E. Lovett for National Community Television Association, Inc., as amicus curiae, in support of the petition.
   C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of National Community Television Association, Inc., for leave to file a brief, as amicus curiae, granted. Certiorari granted and case set for oral argument immediately following Nos. 363 and 428 (see ante, p. 911). The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief expressing the views of the United States.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.


text:
    No. 630.
    United States et al. v. Coleman et al.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Weisl, Robert S. Rifkind, Roger P. Marquis and George R. Hyde for the United States et al.

      George W. Nilsson, W. Howard Gray, Howard A. Twitty and Edward A. McCabe for respondents.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari granted.

Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.


text:
    No. 348.
    Beneficial Finance Co., Inc. v. Vine.

      Wilkie Bushby and Joseph Schreiber for petitioner.

      Lawrence M. Powers for respondent.
   C. A. 2d Cir: Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 353.
    Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen & Enginemen et al. v. Bangor & Aroostook Railroad Co. et al.

      Joseph L. Rauh, Jr., John Silard, Harriett R. Taylor, Isaac N. Groner, Harold C. Heiss, Donald W. Bennett, Alex Elson, Willard J. Lassers and Aaron S. Wolff for petitioners.

      Francis M. Shea, Richard T. Conway, James R. Wolfe and Charles I. Hopkins, Jr., for respondents.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 534.
    Bencomo v. Bencomo.

      Daniel L. Ginsberg for petitioner.

      Sam I. Silver for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Fla. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 589.
    Salardino et al. v. City and County of Denver.

      William Hurt Erickson for petitioners.

      Max P. Zall for respondent.
   Sup. Ct. Colo. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 581.
    Japanese War Notes Claimants Association of the Philippines, Inc. v. United States.

      Lawrence C. Moore for petitioner.

      Solicitor General Griswold for the United States.
   Ct. Cl. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 583.
    No. 584.
    Graham et ux. v. Hodges et al.; and Felton v. Hodges et al.

      Henry R. Carr and Phillip A. Hub-bart for petitioners in each case.

      Earl Fair cloth, Attorney General of Florida, and Robert A. Chastain, Assistant Attorney General, for respondents in both cases.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Reported below: No. 583, 374 F. 2d 340; No. 584, 374 F. 2d 337.


text:
    No. 585.
    Schweitzer et ux. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

      Nicholas R. Doman for petitioners.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Rogovin, Harold C. Wilkenjeld and Jeanine Jacobs for respondent.
   C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 586.
    Wood, Wire & Metal Lathers International Union, AFL-CIO, et al. v. Dunlop et al.

      Mozart G. Ratner for petitioner Wood, Wire & Metal Lathers International Union, AFL-CIO, and Jerome H. Simonds for petitioner Employing Lathers Association of Greater New York & Vicinity et al.
   C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 587.
    Litton v. Virginia.

      H. E. Widener, Jr., for petitioner.
   Sup. Ct. App. Va. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 595.
    Garvin et al. v. Childers.

      Marshall Funk for petitioners.

      Maxey B. Harlin for respondent.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 590.
    Gray v. Porter.
   Ct. App. Md. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 592.
    Swanson v. Florida Bar et al.

      Will O. Murrell for petitioner.

      William H. Adams III for respondents.
   C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 598.
    Lincoln Manufacturing Co., Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board.

      Burton Y. Weitzenfeld for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli and Norton J. Come for respondent.
   C. A. 7th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.


text:
    No. 599.
    County of Wayne v. United States.

      Aloysius J. Suchy and William F. Koney for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Rogovin, Joseph Kovner and Edward Lee Rogers for the United States.

      Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Robert A. Derengoski, Solicitor General, and T. Carl Holbrook and William D. Dexter, Assistant Attorneys General, for the State of Michigan, and Julius C. Pliskow for the City of Detroit, as amici curiae, in support of the petition.
   C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.


text:
    No. 603.
    Santos v. United States.

      Henry Rothblatt and Emma Alden Rothblatt for petitioner.

      Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson, Jerome M. Feit and Kirby W. Patterson for the United States.
   C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.