Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Linda A. Smith, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Mabel D. Haden, Appellee/cross-Appellant, 95-7014 (1995)

Court: Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Number: 95-7014 Visitors: 2
Filed: Nov. 21, 1995
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 69 F.3d 606 314 U.S.App.D.C. 442 Linda A. SMITH, Appellant/Cross-Appellee v. Mabel D. HADEN, Appellee/Cross-Appellant. Nos. 95-7014, 95-7033. United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit. Nov. 21, 1995. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Before: EDWARDS, Chief Judge; HENDERSON and ROGERS, Circuit Judges.JUDGMENT 1 This case was heard on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs and ar
More

69 F.3d 606

314 U.S.App.D.C. 442

Linda A. SMITH, Appellant/Cross-Appellee
v.
Mabel D. HADEN, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

Nos. 95-7014, 95-7033.

United States Court of Appeals,

District of Columbia Circuit.
Nov. 21, 1995.

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

Before: EDWARDS, Chief Judge; HENDERSON and ROGERS, Circuit Judges.JUDGMENT

1

This case was heard on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs and arguments by counsel. Upon consideration thereof, it is

2

Ordered that the judgment from which this appeal has been taken be affirmed substantially for the reasons stated in the district court's memorandum opinion of December 23, 1994. See Smith v. Haden, 872 F. Supp. 1040 (D.D.C.1994). The cross-appeal is therefore moot.

3

The clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C.Cir.Rule 41(a)(1).

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