Sunshine Book Company v. Summerfield, 587

CourtU.S. Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM
CitationSunshine Book Company v. Summerfield, 355 U.S. 372, 78 S.Ct. 365, 2 L.Ed.2d 352 (1958)
Decision Date13 January 1958
Docket NumberNo. 587,587
PartiesSUNSHINE BOOK COMPANY and Solar Union Naturisme, Inc., petitioners, v. Arthur E. SUMMERFIELD, Individually and as Postmaster General of the United States

Mr. O. John Rogge, for petitioners.

Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Doub and Mr. Samuel D. Slade, for respondent.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is reversed. Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 77 S.Ct. 1304, 1 L.Ed.2d 1498.

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
148 cases
  • State v. Andrews
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • November 6, 1962
    ...352, reversing 241 F.2d 772 (9th Cir. 1957); and (4) a postal order finding nudist material unmailable. Sunshine Book Co. v. Summerfield, 355 U.S. 372, 78 S.Ct. 365, 2 L.Ed.2d 352, reversing 101 U.S.App.D.C. 358, 249 F.2d 114 (1957). Whether the United States Supreme Court made an independe......
  • Com. v. Horton
    • United States
    • Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • April 23, 1974
    ...S.Ct. 267, 2 L.Ed.2d 187 (1957); One, Inc. v. Olesen, 355 U.S. 371, 78 S.Ct. 364, 2 L.Ed.2d 352 (1958); Sunshine Book Co. v. Summerfield, 355 U.S. 372, 78 S.Ct. 365, 2 L.Ed.2d 352 (1958); Kingsley Intl. Pictures Corp. v. Regents of Univ. of State of N.Y., 360 U.S. 684, 79 S.Ct. 1362, 3 L.Ed......
  • Bose Corporation v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • April 30, 1984
    ...1029, 1031, 90 L.Ed. 1295]; see also One, Inc. v. Olesen, 355 U.S. 371 [78 S.Ct. 364, 2 L.Ed.2d 352]; Sunshine Book Co. v. Summerfield, 355 U.S. 372 [78 S.Ct. 365, 2 L.Ed.2d 352]. We must 'make an independent examination of the whole record,' Edwards v. South Carolina, 372 U.S. 229, 235 [83......
  • United States v. Standard Drywall Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • August 28, 1985
    ... ... Drywall or Standard) as a "double breasted" company. In other words, according to the indictment, Standard had ... Stamford Restaurant Operating Co., 587 F.Supp. 875, 878 (S.D.N.Y.1984) ...          10 ... ...
  • Get Started for Free
4 books & journal articles
  • Obscenity, morality, and the First Amendment: the first LGBT rights cases before the Supreme Court.
    • United States
    • Columbia Journal of Gender and Law Vol. 28 No. 2, January - January 2015
    • January 1, 2015
    ...Corp. v. Regents of the Univ. of the State of N.Y., 360 U.S. 684 (1959); One, Inc. v. Olesen, 355 U.S. 371 (1958); Sunshine Book Co. v. Summerfield, 355 U.S. 372 (1958). In 1966, the Court sided with the government in two cases. See Ginzburg v. United States, 383 U.S. 463, 470 (1966) (uphol......
  • Pornography and Politics: the Court, the Constitution, and the Commission
    • United States
    • Sage Political Research Quarterly No. 24-4, December 1971
    • December 1, 1971
    ...The Homosexual Magazine, Inc. v. Oelsen, 355 U.S. 371 (1958), reversing 241 F.2d772 (9th Cir. 1957) ; Sunshine Book Co. v. Summerfield, 355 U.S. 372 (1958),reversing 249 F.2d 114 (D.C. Cir. 1957) ; Times Film Corp. v. Chicago, 355 U.S. 35,reversing 244 F.2d 432 (7th Cir. 1957).17 360 U.S. 6......
  • Proactive legislation and the First Amendment.
    • United States
    • Michigan Law Review Vol. 99 No. 2, November 2000
    • November 1, 2000
    ...the Fourteenth Amendment, protect.' Pennekamp v. Florida, 328 U.S. 331, 335; see also One, Inc. v. Olesen, 355 U.S. 371; Sunshine Book Co. v. Summerfield, 355 U.S. 372. We must `make an independent examination of the whole record,' Edwards v. South Carolina, 372 U.S. 22% 235, so as to assur......
  • Yale.
    • United States
    • Michigan Law Review Vol. 102 No. 8, August 2004
    • August 1, 2004
    ...had lawyers. Yale insisted that the cases could not be read that way in light of existing Supreme Court precedent, chiefly Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 365 (1963). A conservative judge who was attending this particular meeting insisted that he didn't believe that the cases had to be read ......