Dee v. Reno
This text of Dee v. Reno (Dee v. Reno) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Dee v. Reno, (1st Cir. 1996).
Opinion
USCA1 Opinion
April 10, 1996
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 95-2173
MICHAEL J. DEE,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
JANET RENO, Attorney General and
ANDREW KETTERER, Attorney General of the State of Maine,
Defendants, Appellees.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE
[Hon. D. Brock Hornby, U.S. District Judge] ___________________
____________________
Before
Selya, Cyr and Lynch,
Circuit Judges. ______________
____________________
Michael J. Dee on brief pro se. ______________
Jay P. McCloskey, United States Attorney, and Evan J. Roth, _________________ ______________
Assistant U.S. Attorney on brief for appellee, Attorney General Reno.
Andrew Ketterer, Attorney General, James D. Williams III, ________________ _________________________
Assistant Attorney General, and Thomas D. Warren, Chief, Litigation ________________
Division, Assistant Attorney General, on brief for appellee, Andrew
Ketterer.
____________________
____________________
Per Curiam. Plaintiff/appellant Michael Dee ___________
challenges a district court discretionary decision not to
entertain a declaratory judgment action. We have reviewed
the parties' briefs and the record on appeal and affirm the
judgment essentially for the reasons stated by the district
court in its order dated September 11, 1995.
Affirmed. _________
-3-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
Dee v. Reno, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dee-v-reno-ca1-1996.