# Carroll v. President & Commissioners of Princess Anne

> Supreme Court of the United States · November 19, 1968 · 393 U.S. 175

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9423853

## Case

- **Full name:** CARROLL Et Al. v. PRESIDENT AND COMMISSIONERS OF PRINCESS ANNE Et Al.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States
- **Decided:** November 19, 1968
- **Citations:** 393 U.S. 175; 1 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1016; 89 S. Ct. 347; 21 L. Ed. 2d 325; 1968 U.S. LEXIS 2948
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Douglas
- **Judges:** Fortas, Douglas, Black
- **Cited by:** 489 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9423853

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- recognizing “a place in our jurisprudence for ex parte issuance, without notice, of temporary restraining orders of short duration” but not “where no showing is made that it is impossible to serve or to notify the opposing parties and to give them an opportunity to participate”
- recognizing that "[t]here is a place in our jurisprudence for ex parte issuance, without notice, of temporary __ restraining orders of short duration"
- holding that a ten-day restraining order against demonstrations was capable of repetition and always likely to evade review because litigation would be completed before the ten days expired
- noting that the Court need not decide the "thorny" problem of whether an injunction against a white supremacist organization's rally could be justified based on findings that the organization had engaged in unprotected conduct at a prior rally because the injunction could be i…
- holding that ex parte TRO was “clear[ly]” 16 improper “in the absence of a showing that reasonable efforts to notify the adverse parties were 17 unsuccessful”

## Opinion text

Mu. Justice Douglas,
while joining the opinion of the Court, adheres to his dissent in Kingsley Books, Inc. v. Brown, 354 U. S. 436, 446-447 , and to his concurring opinion in Freedman v. Maryland, 380 U. S. 51, 61-62 .

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9423853. Public record. Not legal advice.