CULLEN

v.

YEAGER, PRINCIPAL KEEPER

Citator

Cited By

• Whitcomb v. Chavis, 403 U.S. 124 (U.S. 1971)
  …approved and the court retained jurisdiction for the purpose of passing on any- future claims of unconstitutionality made by the plaintiffs against any future legislative apportionment plan promulgated. This Court stayed the District Court’s order. 396 U. S. 1055. This suit was commenced some 22 months before the 1970 election in ample time for a décision on the merits. The plaintiffs in fact won below but this Court stayed the order. Now the election has been held and a federal decennial census, has been t…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Upham v. Seamon, 456 U.S. 37 (U.S. 1982)
  …to order or to permit elections to be held pursuant to apportionment plans that do not in all respects measure up to the legal requirements, even constitutional requirements. See, e. g., Bullock v. Weiser, 404 U. S. 1065 (1972); Whitcomb v. Chavis, 396 U. S. 1055 (1970). Necessity has been the motivating factor in these situations, Because we are not now as familiar as the District Court with the Texas election laws and the legal and practical factors that may bear on whether the primary elections should. b…
• Md. Citizens FOR A Representative Gen. Assembly v. Governor OF Maryland, 429 F.2d 606 (4th Cir. 1970)
  …uary 24, 1970, so that the new apportionment was approved a little more than three months before the closing of the filing period. On February 2, 1970, the Supreme Court granted a stay of the District Court’s order pending disposition of the appeal. 396 U.S. 1055, 90 S.Ct. 748, 24 L.Ed.2d 757. On February 6, 1970, the Court refused to vacate that stay, with Justice Douglas dissenting on the ground that the effect of the stay was to allow the election to occur under an apportionment which the District Court h…