Dama v. Bronstein

Third Circuit Court of Appeals

Argued Dec. 14, 1972. Decided Dec. 14, 1972.

Third Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1972-12-14

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently April 2017

3 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2113

Relies on Glasser v. United States · United States v. Scales · Gaffney v. Cummings Et Al.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1972-12-14

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Samuel Resnicoff, New York City, for appellants.

Stanley Buchsbaum, New York City (Norman Redlich, Corporation Counsel for City of New York, on the brief), for appellees.

Before KAUFMAN, ANDERSON and OAKES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

The district judge dismissed the complaint on the ground of mootness because he believed "that the substantive issue plaintiffs seek to raise is the one decided . . . by the three-judge court in Dougall v. Sugarman . . . now pending in the Supreme Court." [339 F.Supp. 906, probable jurisdiction noted, 407 U.S. 908, 92 S.Ct. 2434, 32 L.Ed.2d 682] We are of the view that the better procedure would have been for Judge Frankel to have withheld his order of dismissal, pending resolution of Dougall by the Supreme Court. Accordingly, we reverse the order of the district court and remand with directions to refrain from further proceedings pending the decision in Dougall v. Sugarman.