Martin v. Creasy
360 U.S. 219 · Decided June 8, 1959 · 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
Martin v. Creasy was decided on June 8, 1959 by a vote of 8–1. The Court reversed the lower court's decision. Justice Potter Stewart wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Comity, removal cases and foreign tribunals” in the Judicial Power area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 360 U.S. 219 · 79 S. Ct. 1034 · 3 L. Ed. 2d 1186 · 1959 U.S. LEXIS 855
- Docket number
- 157
- Decided
- June 8, 1959
- Argued
- April 2, 1959
- 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
- 8–1
- Majority opinion
- Potter Stewart
- Opinion assigned by
- Earl Warren
- How the case arrived
- Appeal
- Issue (SCDB)
- Comity, removal cases and foreign tribunals
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Legal provision
- Abstention doctrine
- Type of law
- Other
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Hugo L. Black | Majority | |
| Justice Felix Frankfurter | Majority | |
| Justice William O. Douglas | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Tom C. Clark | Majority | |
| Chief Justice Earl Warren | Special concurrence | |
| Justice John M. Harlan II | Majority | |
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Special concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Charles E. Whittaker | Majority | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
Full case caption
Martin, Successor to Lawler, Secretary of Highways of Pennsylvania, et al. v. Creasy et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1958-106, docket 1958-106-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Comity, removal cases and foreign tribunals”
- Louisiana Power & Light Co. v. City of Thibodaux
- County of Allegheny v. Frank Mashuda Co.
- Metlakatla Indian Community v. Egan
- Leiter Minerals, Inc. v. United States
- United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Ideal Cement Co.
- Doud v. Hodge
Cases on the same legal provision: Abstention doctrine
- Harrison v. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
- National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Inc. v. Bennett
- City of Meridian v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.
- Turner v. City of MemphisLaw held unconstitutional
- Hostetter v. Idlewild Bon Voyage Liquor Corp.Law held unconstitutional
- Zwickler v. Koota
Same Term, same area (Judicial Power)
- Hinkle v. New England Mutual Insurance Company of Boston
- Hotel Employees Local No. 255 v. Leedom
- Flemming v. Florida Citrus Exchange
- Leedom v. Kyne
- Rogers v. Calumet National Bank of Hammond
- Herrmann v. Rogers
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