Court Opinion

ID: 9426310
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 23:17:31.457705+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:23:00.153433
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Stevens,
with whom Mr. Justice Rehnquist joins,
dissenting.
In Deen v. Hickman, 358 U. S. 57, it was necessary to require the Texas Supreme Court to conform its decision to our mandate in order to make sure that further proceedings in the underlying litigation would be properly conducted. In this case no matter what we do, there will be no further proceedings in the underlying litigation. The circumstances recited in the opinion of the Court, therefore, would not justify the issuance of an extraordinary writ. Since I would not vote in favor of such a writ, I would also deny the motion for leave to file.