Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Gordon H. Mitchell v. Roy P. Parham and Oklahoma Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, 8175 (1965)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Number: 8175 Visitors: 7
Filed: May 28, 1965
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 345 F.2d 797 Gordon H. MITCHELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Roy P. PARHAM and Oklahoma Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, Defendants-Appellees. No. 8175. United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit. May 28, 1965. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma; Stephen S. Chandler, Judge. Odes J. Harwood, Midwest City, Okl., for plaintiff-appellant. Burck Bailey, Asst. Atty. Gen., of Oklahoma, for defendants-appellees. Before MURRAH, Chief Judge, and PHILLIPS and B
More

345 F.2d 797

Gordon H. MITCHELL, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Roy P. PARHAM and Oklahoma Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 8175.

United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit.

May 28, 1965.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma; Stephen S. Chandler, Judge.

Odes J. Harwood, Midwest City, Okl., for plaintiff-appellant.

Burck Bailey, Asst. Atty. Gen., of Oklahoma, for defendants-appellees.

Before MURRAH, Chief Judge, and PHILLIPS and BREITENSTEIN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

1

The appeal is dismissed because of the lack of an appealable order. See Midwestern Developments, Inc. v. City of Tulsa, 10 Cir., 319 F.2d 53; and Crutcher v. Joyce, 10 Cir., 134 F.2d 809, 813, 814.

2

On remand, if the plaintiff desires to amend his pleadings, he must do so within 10 days of the date of remand. If he fails to amend, the court should promptly enter a final order dismissing the action.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer