Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

335 F.2d 281

Docket No. 17449.

Wolfsohn v. Hankin

District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided May 6, 1964.

Motion for Rehearing en Banc Denied June 23, 1964.

Certiorari Denied Dec. 14, 1964.

District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1964-05-06

2 counsel of record

Relies on Wolfsohn v. Hankin

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1964-05-06

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 2007

3 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

4019641970198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1See 85 S.Ct. 437.

¶2Mr. Fred I. Simon, Silver Spring, Md., for appellant.

¶3Mr. Gregory Hankin, Washington, D. C., filed pleadings pro se.

¶4Before Edgerton, Senior Circuit Judge, and Wright and McGowan, Circuit Judges, in Chambers.

¶5ORDER

¶6PER CURIAM.

¶7Whereas this court on May 29, 1963, entered a judgment dismissing the appeal in the above-entitled case, and whereas a certified copy of the judgment was issued to the District Court on September 24, 1963, and whereas the Supreme Court of the United States granted a petition for writ of certiorari to this court reversing and remanding this case for further proceedings, and appellant having filed a motion for summary reversal, and this case having been heard on the merits on the record on appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and was argued by counsel, on consideration whereof it is

¶8Ordered that the certified copy of the judgment and opinion issued to the District Court is hereby recalled, and it is

¶9Further ordered that the judgment and opinion dated May 29, 1963, 116 U.S. App.D.C. 127, 321 F.2d 393, are hereby vacated, and it is

¶10Further ordered that appellant’s motion for summary reversal is hereby denied, and it is

¶11Further ordered that the judgment of the District Court appealed from in this cause be and it is hereby affirmed, and it is

¶12Further ordered by the court that appellee Hankin recover from appellant his taxable costs on this appeal and have execution therefor.

/335/f2d/281 · .json · Public domain