Case: Legerlotz v. Rogers, Attorney General
Abbreviation: Legerlotz v. Rogers
Decision Date: 1959-10-12
Docket Number: No. 213
Citation: 361 U.S. 808
Volume: 361
Reporter: United States Reports
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: Legerlotz v. Rogers, Attorney General.
Judges: 
Pages: 808–808

Head Matter:
No. 213.
Legerlotz v. Rogers, Attorney General.
Robert H. Reiter for petitioner. Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Townsend, George B. Searls and Irwin A. Seibel for respondent.

Opinion:
United States Court of Appeals for the District-of Columbia Circuit. Certiorari granted. Counsel are directed to discuss in their briefs and oral arguments, among other questions, the question whether the amendment of a "Return Order," as opposed to a "Notice of Intention to Return," is permissible, under the pertinent regulations or otherwise, and, if not, the effect of such an amendment on' the pertinent limitations period.
[Note: This sentence was added by an order entered October 19, 1959.]