Case: HOLDING, dba GRAND NEWS v. BLANKENSHIP et al.
Abbreviation: Holding v. Blankenship
Decision Date: 1967-05-15
Docket Number: No. 1088
Citation: 387 U.S. 94
Volume: 387
Reporter: United States Reports
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: HOLDING, dba GRAND NEWS v. BLANKENSHIP et al.
Judges: Mr. Justice Harlan concurs in the denial of certiorari as to Question 2, but would affirm the judgment of the District Court as to Question 1.
Pages: 94–94

Head Matter:
HOLDING, dba GRAND NEWS v. BLANKENSHIP et al.
No. 1088.
Decided May 15, 1967.
Samuel W. Block, Thomas P. Sullivan and Paul C. Duncan for appellant.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Probable jurisdiction noted as to Question 1. The judgment of the District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma entered November 4,1966, is reversed insofar as it adjudged provisions of § 1040.1 to 1040.10 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes to be constitutional. Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan, 372 U. S. 58. Treating the nonappealable issue presented by Question 2 as if contained in a petition for a writ of certiorari, the petition is denied. See Mishkin v. New York, 383 U. S. 502, 512.
Mr. Justice Harlan concurs in the denial of certiorari as to Question 2, but would affirm the judgment of the District Court as to Question 1.
Mr. Justice White would note probable jurisdiction and set the case for oral argument.