Wetherington v. Adams, 26136.
| Decision Date | 27 January 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 26136.,26136. |
| Citation | 406 F.2d 724 |
| Parties | Gary Lee WETHERINGTON, Appellant, v. Tom O. ADAMS, Individually and as Secretary of State of Florida and as Commissioner of Elections, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Gary Lee Wetherington, pro se.
Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Chastain, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, Fla., for appellee.
Before THORNBERRY and DYER, Circuit Judges, and KEADY, District Judge.
Wetherington filed a complaint in the District Court, moved for injunctive relief against the application of a state statute, and requested the convening of a three-judge court pursuant to 28 U.S. C.A. § 2281. The complaint was dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. We reverse.
The complaint attacked the constitutionality of Florida statutes requiring candidates for political party nomination to state elective office to pay a minimum filing fee and party assessment, e. g., Fla. Stat. §§ 99.092, 103.121 (1967), F.S.A., under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Civil Rights Acts, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1343, 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983. It raised the substantial constitutional question, "to what extent may a State, consistent with equal protection and the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of association, impose restrictions upon a candidate's desire to be placed on the ballot?" Williams v. Rhodes, 393 U.S. 23, 89 S.Ct. 5, 21 L.Ed.2d 24 (1968) (Warren, C. J., dissenting). Cf. Harper v. Virginia Bd. of Elections, 1966, 383 U.S. 663, 86 S.Ct. 1079, 16 L.Ed.2d 169.
When an application for a statutory three-judge court is addressed to a district court, the court\'s inquiry is appropriately limited to determining whether the constitutional question raised is substantial, whether the complaint at least formally alleges a basis for equitable relief, and whether the case presented otherwise comes within the requirements of the three-judge statute. Those criteria were assuredly met here, and the applicable jurisdictional statute therefore made it impermissible for a single judge to decide the merits of the case, either by granting or by withholding relief. Idlewild Bon Voyage Liquor Corp. v. Epstein, 1962, 370 U.S. 713, 715, 82 S.Ct. 1294, 8 L.Ed.2d 794. See also Jackson v. Choate, 5 Cir. 1968, 404 F.2d 910 1968.
The case is reversed and remanded with instructions to request the convening of a three-judge court by the Chief Judge of this Circuit.
Reversed and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Quarles v. State of Texas
...Hargrave v. McKinney, 413 F.2d 320 (5th Cir.1969); Randolph v. Simpson, 410 F.2d 1067 (5th Cir.1969) (C. J. Brown); and Wetherington v. Adams, 406 F.2d 724 (5th Cir.1969). See also, Parker v. Tangipahoa, Parish School Bd., 299 F.Supp. 421 (E.D.La.1969). In Hargrave and Wetherington, the cou......
-
Barnhart v. Mandel
...Member of House of Delegates of Maryland has been accepted by the election officials of Anne Arundel County. 3 Also, Wetherington v. Adams, 406 F.2d 724 (5th Cir. 1969), reversing the district judge's refusal to call a three judge court in connection with a challenge to the Florida election......
-
Diffenderfer v. Homer
...disposition without oral argument. See Magnesium Casting Co. v. Hoban, 1 Cir., 1968, 401 F.2d 516. 3 A companion case, Wetherington v. Adams, 5 Cir., 1969, 406 F.2d 724, presented the same substantive question as that raised here. In Wetherington, this Court considered the merits of the cla......
-
LOCAL U. NO. 300, AMAL. MEAT CUTTERS & B. WORK. v. McCulloch
...Agricultural Labor Relations, 14 Stanford L.Rev. 120 (1961). Thus the criteria for a three-judge court have been met. Wetherington v. Adams, 5 Cir., 1969, 406 F.2d 724. The case is reversed and remanded with instructions to request the convening of a three-judge court by the Chief Judge of ......