Adams v. Hiatt
This text of 173 F.2d 896 (Adams v. Hiatt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The petitioner has filed a petition for rehearing renewing his motion for substitution of Humphrey for Hiatt, Warden. It is unnecessary to pass on the question as to whether Humphrey may be substituted for Hiatt as succeeding warden of the United States Penitentiary at Lewisburg since the petitioner has been released by order of the United States Board of Parole and is no longer in custody. Weber v. Squier, Warden, 315 U.S. 810, 62. S.Ct. 800, 86 L.Ed. 1209. Cf. Anderson v. Corall, 263 U.S. 193, 44 S.Ct. 43, 68 L.Ed. 247. The cause being moot we dismissed the ap- • peal. No cogent reason appearing' for rehearing we will deny the petition.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
173 F.2d 896, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2927, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adams-v-hiatt-ca3-1949.