Dama v. Bronstein

Second Circuit

Dama v. Bronstein

471 F.2d 297

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided December 14, 1972·No. No. 225 Docket 72-1769·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The district judge dismissed the complaint on the ground of mootness because he believed “that the substantive issue plaintiffs seek to raise is the one decided ... by the three-judge court in Dougall v. Sugarman . now pending in the Supreme Court.” [339 F.Supp. 906, probable jurisdiction noted, 407 U.S. 908, 92 S.Ct. 2434, 32 L.Ed.2d 682] We are of the view that the better procedure would have been for Judge Frankel to have withheld his order of dismissal, pending resolution of Dougall by the Supreme Court. Accordingly, we reverse the order of the district court and remand with directions to refrain from further proceedings pending the decision in Dougall v. Sugar-man.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

The district judge dismissed the complaint on the ground of mootness because he believed “that the substantive issue plaintiffs seek to raise is the one decided ... by the three-judge court in Dougall v. Sugarman . now pending in the Supreme Court.” [339 F.Supp. 906, probable jurisdiction noted, 407 U.S. 908, 92 S.Ct. 2434, 32 L.Ed.2d 682] We are of the view that the better procedure would have been for Judge Frankel to have withheld his order of dismissal, pending resolution of Dougall by the Supreme Court. Accordingly, we reverse the order of the district court and remand with directions to refrain from further proceedings pending the decision in Dougall v. Sugar-man.

Dama v. Bronstein, 471 F.2d 297 (2d Cir. 1972).

Pincite

471 F.2d 297 (Dama v. Bronstein) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related