Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

345 F.2d 748

Docket No. 18770.

Studemeyer v. Macy

District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals

Argued March 8, 1965. Decided April 12, 1965.

District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1965-04-12

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently July 1971

7 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Studemeyer v. Macy · Studemeyer v. Macy · Studemeyer v. Macy

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1965-04-12

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Mr. Donald M. Murtha, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. Claude L. Dawson, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for appellant.

Mr. Robert B. Norris, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Messrs. David C. Acheson, U.S. Atty., and Frank Q. Nebeker, Asst. U.S. Atty., were on the brief, for appellees.

Before EDGERTON, Senior Circuit Judge, and FAHY and WRIGHT, Circuit judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

The appellant seeks to set aside his discharge from civilian employment with the Air Force. We remanded this case in Studemeyer v. Macy, 116 U.S.App.D.C. 75, 320 F.2d 797 (1963). The District Court held a hearing and entered summary judgment for the defendants. Studemeyer v. Macy, 228 F.Supp. 411 (1964). The plaintiff appeals.

¶2

As the District Court points out, the witnesses who the complaint says were unavailable at the Civil Service hearing were in fact present, and the appellant did not inform the Air Force that certain other military personnel refused to appear at his request. We agree with the District Court that the appellant is entitled to no relief.

¶3

Affirmed.

/345/f2d/748 · .json · Public domain