Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

352 F.2d 805

Docket No. 22219.

Bailey v. United States

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Nov. 12, 1965.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1965-11-12

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently November 1965

1 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on United States v. Starks

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1965-11-12

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*806Earl E. Cloud, Larry Bruce Abies, Huntsville, Ala., Cloud, Berry & Abies, Huntsville, Ala., for appellant.

¶2Macon L. Weaver,,U. S. Atty., Birmingham, Ala., Morton Hollander, John G. Eldridge, Martin Jacobs, Attys., Dept, of Justice, Washington, D. C., John W. Douglas, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

¶3Before MARIS,* RIVES and BELL, Circuit Judges.

¶5PER CURIAM.

¶6This appeal is from the grant of a motion for summary judgment. Appellant, a lessee of grazing lands from the United States, brought suit under the Federal Tort Claims Act for damages to cattle allegedly caused by the negligence of the United States. The motion was based on an exculpatory and hold harmless clause in the lease.1 It was controlling in the circumstances and the District Court properly terminated the litigation by granting the niotion. United States v. Starks, 7 Cir., 1957, 239 F.2d 544.

¶7The motion to tax appellee with printing costs is denied.

¶8Affirmed.

/352/f2d/805 · .json · Public domain