Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

82 F.3d 425

Docket No. 95-5211.

Einstein v. Tulsa County Elect.

This page is marked noindex.

Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1996-04-09

Relies on Gragg v. McKune

Opinion by Carlos F. Lucero · Decided 1996-04-09

NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or further order.

Before SEYMOUR, McKAY, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

LUCERO, Circuit Judge.

¶1

Boss Man Einstein appeals from a district court order of September 28, 1995, refusing to consider his Motion for Relief. The district court correctly noted that Appellant's case was dismissed on October 6, 1992, and that this court subsequently affirmed that dismissal. Appellant failed to suggest any grounds, and we can discern no grounds, on which relief could be granted.

¶3

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

*

The case is unanimously ordered submitted without oral argument pursuant to the applicable rules. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3

/82/f3d/425 · .json · Public domain