Caulfield v. United States; Dickson v. Edwards, 1961

File — Folder: 3

Identifier: Folder 3

Staff Only

Caulfield v. United States No.18,429; 293 F.2d 217 (1961), cert. 858 (1962) Dickson v. Edwards No. 18,351; 293 F.2d 211 (1961) Dissenting opinions of Judge Wisdom. The en banc hearing in Caulfield and the en banc hearing in Dickson followed inconsistent opinions of two different panels of the court. In Dickson, Judge Brown wrote for court of himself, Judge Cameron, and District Judge Hannay. Caulfield was argued before Chief Judge Tuttle, and Judges Brown and Wisdom. In both cases Judge Brown circulated proposed opinions to affirm. In Dickson Judges Cameron and Hannay concurred; in Caulfield Chief Judge Tuttle concurred. The Dickson opinion was published. Judge Wisdom then circulated a dissent in Caulfield, which Chief Judge Tuttle found persuasive. Chief Judge Tuttle accordingly withdrew his concurrence in the Brown opinion; a per curiam to reverse in Caulfield was prepared. Chief Judge Tuttle proposed that the per curiam be published, followed by the opinions of Judges Brown and Wisdom, for the benefit of counsel, then, that they immediately be vacated by the court en banc. This the court rejected, voting instead to put both cases en banc. Though not published, counsel were furnished the proposed opinions nonetheless. Judge Wisdom's draft opinion was modified to serve as a dissent from the decisions in both cases, Judge Brown wrote for the majority. Includes original proposed opinion of Judge Brown to affirm in Caulfield; TLS of Judge Brown and TLS of Chief Judge Tuttle on the opinion of Judge Brown; proposed dissenting opinoion of Judge Wisdom; TLS (2) of Judge Brown and TLS of Chief Judge Tuttle on the propsed dissend; proposed per curiam opinion of the Caulfield panel to reverse; and, TLs of Chief Judge Tuttle on the proposed per curiam opinion and on publication of the Caulfield panel opinions as appropriate. Also includes TLS of Judge Jones on the merits and on federal jurisdictin, generally; TLS of Judge Brown on his proposed opinions in the two cases; ANS of Judge rives (on TLS of Judge Wisdom ) on the dissent of Judge Wisdom; and, TLs (3) of Judge Hutcheson on the merits, the Brown and Wisdom opinions, and on federal jurisdiction generally. And includes TL of J.D. De Blieux, counsel for appellant, to Congressman Fred Marshall (D.Minn.) on Caulfield; TL of Judge Wisdom to Louis L. Jaffe, Professor, Harvard Law School, ANS of Jaffee to Judge Wisdom, and TLS of Frederick Davis, Professor, Tulane University School of Law, to Judge Wisdom, on the opinion of Judge Widsom.And includes TLS of Judge Rives reverring to Bowdoin v. Malone, 284 F.2d 95 (1960), reh. den. 287 F.2d 282 (1961), and on the need for the court to adopt rules governing en banc hearings and en banc rehearings, generally.