In re Green
369 U.S. 689 · Decided May 21, 1962 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
In re Green was decided on May 21, 1962 unanimously (7–0). The Court reversed the lower court's decision. Justice William O. Douglas wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Due process, hearing or notice” in the Due Process area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 369 U.S. 689 · 82 S. Ct. 1114 · 8 L. Ed. 2d 198 · 1962 U.S. LEXIS 2141
- Docket number
- 312
- Decided
- May 21, 1962
- Argued
- April 9, 1962
- Court era
- Warren Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 7–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- William O. Douglas
- Opinion assigned by
- Earl Warren
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, hearing or notice
- Issue area
- Due Process
- Legal provision
- Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Hugo L. Black | Majority | |
| Justice William O. Douglas | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Tom C. Clark | Special concurrence | |
| Chief Justice Earl Warren | Majority | |
| Justice John M. Harlan II | Special concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority |
Did not participate: Felix Frankfurter, Byron R. White.
Full case caption
In re Green
SCDB identifiers: case 1961-073, docket 1961-073-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, hearing or notice”
- Oyler v. Boles
- Schroeder v. City of New YorkLaw held unconstitutional
- Willner v. Committee on Character and FitnessLaw held unconstitutional
- Dusky v. United States
- Sublett v. Adams
- Armstrong v. Manzo et Ux.
Cases on the same legal provision: Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Beck v. Washington
- Gallegos v. Colorado
- Taylor v. Louisiana
- Garner v. Louisiana
- Cramp v. Board of Public Instruction of Orange CountyLaw held unconstitutional
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Pennsylvania
Same Term, same area (Due Process)
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Pennsylvania
- Oyler v. Boles
- Griggs v. Allegheny County
- Goldblatt v. Town of Hempstead
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error