BRYAN ET AL.
v.
AUSTIN, SUPERINTENDENT, SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 7, ORANGEBURG COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA, ET AL.
BRYAN ET AL.
AUSTIN, SUPERINTENDENT, SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 7, ORANGEBURG COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA, ET AL.
354 U.S. 933
Supreme Court of the United States (1957)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 11 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam:
In view of the repeal of South Carolina Act No. 741 of 1956 by Act No. 324 of 1957 after the decision below, 148 F. Supp. 563, the cause has become moot. Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is vacated and the case is remanded to it, with leave to the appellants to amend their pleadings either to safeguard any rights that may have accrued to them by virtue of the operation of the repealed Act or to set forth a cause of action based on the operation of the new Act. Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McGOWAN v. Maryland, 366 U.S. 420 (U.S. 1961)…es of recalling them to the worship of their Maker.” See also Ullner v. Ohio, 358 U. S. 131; Kidd v. Ohio, 358 U. S. 132; McGee v. North Carolina, 346 U. S. 802; cf. Grochowiak v. Pennsylvania, 358 U. S. 47; Gundaker Cent. Motors, Inc., v. Gassert, 354 U. S. 933; Towery v. North Carolina, 347 U. S. 925. As respects the First Amendment the court said: “It does not set up a church, make attendance upon religious worship compulsory, impose restrictions upon expression of religious belief, work a restriction…1 / 5
-
A. L. Mechling Barge Lines, Inc. v. United States, 368 U.S. 324 (U.S. 1961)…sues raised and for its decision thereon, including whether, in the exercise of its discretion, any injunctive or declarative relief is [*336] called for; and with the further instruction, in accordance with the practice utilized in Bryan v. Austin, 354 U. S. 933 (1957), that upon appellants’ request they be granted leave to amend their pleadings to meet the changed condition of the case as brought about by the Commission’s intervening concession that its order was void, as well as its renouncement of the ch…
-
Diffenderfer v. Cent. Baptist Church of Miami, 404 U.S. 412 (U.S. 1972)…sion by this Court, United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U. S. 36, 39, and n. 2 (1950), we vacate the judgment of the District Court and remand the case to the District Court with leave to the appellants to amend their pleadings. Bryan v. Austin, 354 U. S. 933 (1957). Judgment will be entered accordingly. Mr. Justice Powell and Mr. Justice Rehnquist took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence