Shipman v. Du Pre

Decision Date31 March 1950
Docket NumberNo. 689,689
Citation70 S.Ct. 640,94 L.Ed. 877,339 U.S. 321
PartiesSHIPMAN et al. v. DU PRE et al. On Jurisdictional Statement Distributed
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Mr. Aaron Kravitch, Savannah, Ga. Phyllis Kravitch, Savannah, Ga., Mr. Joseph Fromberg, Charleston, S.C., for appellants.

Messrs. John M. Daniel, Columbia, S.C., T. C. Callision, Lexington, S.C., R. Hoke Robinson, Asst. Atty. Gen. of South Carolina, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Appellants sought a declaratory judgment that certain sections of the South Carolina statute, Code 1942, § 3408, as amended by Act April 21, 1948, 45 St. at Large, p. 2059, regulating the fisheries and shrimping industry were unconstitutional and interlocutory and permanent injunctions restraining the state officials from carrying out those provisions. The statutory three-judge District Court assumed jurisdiction, decided the issues on the merits, and dismissed the complaint. 88 F.Supp. 482. From the papers submitted on appeal, it does not appear that the statutory sections in question have as yet been construed by the state courts. We are therefore of opinion that the District Court erred in disposing of the complaint on the merits. See American Federation of Labor v. Watson, 327 U.S. 582, 595—599, 66 S.Ct. 761, 767—769, 90 L.Ed. 873.

The judgment of the District Court is vacated and the cause is remanded to that court with directions to retain jurisdiction of the complaint for a reasonable time, to afford appellants an opportunity to obtain, by appropriate proceedings, a construction by the state court of the statutory provisions involved.

Judgment vacated and cause remanded with directions.

Mr. Justice DOUGLAS dissents.

To continue reading

Request your trial
55 cases
  • NATIONAL ASS'N FOR ADVANCE. OF COLORED PEOPLE v. Patty
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Virginia
    • January 21, 1958
    ...C. I. O. v. Windsor, 347 U.S. 901, 74 S.Ct. 429, 98 L.Ed. 1061; and 353 U.S. 364, 77 S.Ct. 838, 1 L.Ed.2d 894; Shipman v. Dupre, 339 U.S. 321, 70 S.Ct. 640, 94 L.Ed. 877. These rulings, however, do not mean that the federal courts lose jurisdiction in cases where the state courts have not p......
  • Jehovah's Witnesses in State of Wash. v. King County Hosp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Washington
    • June 8, 1967
    ...364, 77 S.Ct. 838, 1 L.Ed.2d 894 (1957); Albertson v. Millard, 345 U.S. 242, 73 S.Ct. 600, 97 L.Ed. 983 (1953); Shipman v. DuPre, 339 U.S. 321, 70 S.Ct. 640, 94 L.Ed. 877 (1950); American Federation of Labor v. Watson, 327 U.S. 582, 66 S.Ct. 761, 90 L.Ed. 873 (1946); Spector Motor Service, ......
  • Lim v. Andrukiewicz
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Rhode Island
    • June 11, 1973
    ...1749; England v. Louisiana State Bd. of Med. Examiners, 375 U.S. 411, 84 S.Ct. 461, 11 L.Ed.2d 440 (1964); Shipman v. Dupre, 339 U.S. 321, 70 S.Ct. 640, 94 L.Ed. 877 (1950); American Federation v. Watson, supra; Spector Motor Service v. McLaughlin, 323 U.S. 101, 65 S.Ct. 152, 89 L.Ed. 101 (......
  • Louisiana Power Light Company v. City of Thibodaux
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • June 8, 1959
    ...States, 352 U.S. 220, 77 S.Ct. 287, 1 L.Ed.2d 267; Albertson v. Millard, 345 U.S. 242, 73 S.Ct. 600, 97 L.Ed. 983; Shipman v. Du Pre, 339 U.S. 321, 70 S.Ct. 640, 94 L.Ed. 877; Stainback v. Mo Hock Ke Lok Po, 336 U.S. 368, 69 S.Ct. 606, 93 L.Ed. 741; American Federation of Labor v. Watson, 3......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT