Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Haig v. Bissonette, 86-987 (1988)

Court: Supreme Court of the United States Number: 86-987 Visitors: 11
Judges: Per Curiam
Filed: Mar. 21, 1988
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: 485 U.S. 264 (1988) HAIG ET AL. v. BISSONETTE ET AL. No. 86-987. Supreme Court of United States. Decided March 21, 1988 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT PER CURIAM. Because the Court lacks a quorum, 28 U.S. C . § 1, and since a majority of the qualified Justices are of the opinion that the case cannot be heard and determined at the next Term of the Court, the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit is affirmed under 28 U.S. C .
More
485 U.S. 264 (1988)

HAIG ET AL.
v.
BISSONETTE ET AL.

No. 86-987.

Supreme Court of United States.

Decided March 21, 1988
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

PER CURIAM.

Because the Court lacks a quorum, 28 U.S. C. § 1, and since a majority of the qualified Justices are of the opinion that the case cannot be heard and determined at the next Term of the Court, the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit is affirmed under 28 U.S. C. § 2109, which provides that under these circumstances the Court shall enter its order affirming the judgment of the court from which the case was brought for review with the same effect as upon affirmance by an equally divided Court.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE, JUSTICE O'CONNOR, JUSTICE SCALIA, and JUSTICE KENNEDY took no part in this decision.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer