Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Pinney v. Butterworth 378 U.S. 564

← Cases

Pinney v. Butterworth

378 U.S. 564 Court SCOTUS Decision date 1964-06-22 Docket No. 1078 English

Judges Mr. Justice Clark would affirm the judgment on the basis of his opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533, 587.; Mr. Justice Stewart would affirm the judgment insofar as it holds that Connecticut’s system of legislative apportionment violates the Equal Protection Clause.; Mr. Justice Harlan dissents for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533, 589.

Delivered by Per Curiam.

Contents

Majority

p. 564
PINNEY et al. v. BUTTERWORTH et al.
No. 1078.
Decided June 22, 1964.
H. Meade Alcorn, Jr., James William Moore and Norman K. Parsells for appellants.
Richard H. Bowerman for appellees.

The judgment below is affirmed. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533 . The case is remanded for further proceedings, with respect to relief, consistent with the views stated in our opinions in Reynolds v. Sims and in the other cases relating to state legislative apportionment decided along with Reynolds.

Mr. Justice Clark would affirm the judgment on the basis of his opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533 , 587.

Mr. Justice Stewart would affirm the judgment insofar as it holds that Connecticut’s system of legislative apportionment violates the Equal Protection Clause.

Mr. Justice Harlan dissents for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U. S. 533 , 589.

Cases cited