Filed: Nov. 08, 1972
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 468 F.2d 624 Reverend Tommie R. SMITH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Malcom V. LEACH et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 27659. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. Nov. 8, 1972. Howard Moore, Jr., Peter E. Rindskopf, Charles Morgan, Jr., Reber F. Boult, Jr., Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff-appellant. Allen L. Chancey, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Wayman G. Sherrer, U. S. Atty., Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen. of Ga., Atlanta, Ga., Robert V. Zen
Summary: 468 F.2d 624 Reverend Tommie R. SMITH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Malcom V. LEACH et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 27659. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. Nov. 8, 1972. Howard Moore, Jr., Peter E. Rindskopf, Charles Morgan, Jr., Reber F. Boult, Jr., Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff-appellant. Allen L. Chancey, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Wayman G. Sherrer, U. S. Atty., Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen. of Ga., Atlanta, Ga., Robert V. Zene..
More
468 F.2d 624
Reverend Tommie R. SMITH, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Malcom V. LEACH et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 27659.
United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.
Nov. 8, 1972.
Howard Moore, Jr., Peter E. Rindskopf, Charles Morgan, Jr., Reber F. Boult, Jr., Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff-appellant.
Allen L. Chancey, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Wayman G. Sherrer, U. S. Atty., Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen. of Ga., Atlanta, Ga., Robert V. Zener, Patricia S. Baptiste, Attys., William D. Ruckelshaus, Asst. Atty. Gen., Civil Div., Donald Horowitz, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for defendants-appellees.
Before JOHN R. BROWN, Chief Judge, and WISDOM, GEWIN, BELL, THORNBERRY, COLEMAN, GOLDBERG, AINSWORTH, GODBOLD, DYER, SIMPSON, MORGAN, CLARK, INGRAHAM and RONEY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
1
It having been made known to the court that appellant Smith has been granted a dependency deferment and is not eligible for induction under current Selective Service policies, the appeal in this cause is dismissed as moot.
