Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

James T. Kearney, Jr. v. John W. MacY Jr., and U.S.A., 23327_1 (1969)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Number: 23327_1 Visitors: 7
Filed: Apr. 25, 1969
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 409 F.2d 847 James T. KEARNEY, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John W. MACY, Jr., and U.S.A. et al., Defendant-Appellee. No. 23327. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. April 25, 1969. Tony Geram, Fontana, Cal., Wirin, Rissman, Okrand & Posner, Fred Okrand, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant. Carolyn M. Reynods, Asst. U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., Wm. D. Ruckelshaus, Asst. Atty. Gen., Washington, D.C., for appellee. Before MERRILL, KOELSCH and DUNIWAY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: 1 The moti
More

409 F.2d 847

James T. KEARNEY, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
John W. MACY, Jr., and U.S.A. et al., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 23327.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

April 25, 1969.

Tony Geram, Fontana, Cal., Wirin, Rissman, Okrand & Posner, Fred Okrand, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant.

Carolyn M. Reynods, Asst. U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., Wm. D. Ruckelshaus, Asst. Atty. Gen., Washington, D.C., for appellee.

Before MERRILL, KOELSCH and DUNIWAY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

The motion of appellee for summary affirmance is granted on the authority of United Public Workers of America v. Mitchell, 1947, 330 U.S. 75, 67 S. Ct. 556, 91 L. Ed. 754. In our opinion, that case, insofar as ti deals with an employee of the United States government such as appellant Kearney, and with a violation of the Hatch Act of the type that Kearney was found to have committed, has not been overruled either expressly or by implication by subsequent decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States.

2

Affirmed.

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