green
Positive treatment
1.3 score
Treatment trajectory · 1964 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1964
1995
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
People v. Belous
Cir.1964) 331 F.2d 1000, 1009 [ 118 App.D.C. 80 , 9 A.L.R.3d 1367 ], cert. denied, 377 U.S. 978 [ 12 L.Ed.2d 746 , 84 S.Ct. 1887 ]; but see, Raleigh Fitkin-Paul Morgan Memorial Hospital v. Anderson (1964) 42 N.J. 421 [ 201 A.2d 537, 538 ], cert. denied, 377 U.S. 985 [ 12 L.Ed.2d 1032 , 84 S.Ct. 1894 ]; suggesting that an 8-month pregnant woman could be required to have blood transfusions to protect the unborn child.) Although sections 3705 and 3706 of the Penal Code, which provide for suspending the execution of a pregnant woman, reflect an interest in the unborn child, the sections do not aff…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Abele v. Markle
(2×)
See also Application of Pres. & Dir. of Georgetown College, 118 U.S.App.D.C. 80 , 331 F.2d 1000 (1964) and Raleigh Fitkin-Paul Memorial Hospital etc. v. Anderson, 42 N.J. 421 , 201 A.2d 537 (1964), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 985 , 84 S.Ct. 1894 , 12 L.Ed.2d 1032 (1964). [4] See note 2, supra. [5] The Council is a bi-partisan body composed of the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the majority and minority leaders of both houses, ex-officio, and three Senators and six Representatives from each major political party, (a total of 9 Senators and 15 House …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
DREWS Et Al.
v.
MARYLAND
v.
MARYLAND
3.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 22, 1964.
Robert B. Watts, Francis D. Murnaghan, Jr. and Jack Greenberg for appellants., Thomas B. Finan, Attorney General of Maryland, and Joseph S. Kaufman, Deputy Attorney General, for appellee.
Bell, Black, Harlan, White.
Cited by 42 opinions | Published
Per Curiam.
The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals of Maryland for consideration in light of Griffin v. Maryland, ante, p. 130, and Bell v. Maryland, ante, p. 226.
Mr. Justice Douglas would reverse outright on the basis of the views expressed in his opinion in Bell v. Maryland, ante, p. 242. Mr. Justice Black, Mr. Justice Harlan and Mr. Justice White dissent.