Devore v. Federal Savings
Opinion
USCA1 Opinion
January 3, 1994
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 93-1872
JOHN W. DEVORE,
AND VINNIE E. DEVORE,
Plaintiffs, Appellants,
v.
FEDERAL SAVINGS BANK OF DOVER, NEW HAMPSHIRE,
Defendant, Appellee.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE
[Hon. Gene Carter, U.S. District Judge]
___________________
____________________
Before
Breyer, Chief Judge,
___________
Selya and Cyr, Circuit Judges.
______________
____________________
John W. Devore and Vinnie E. Devore on brief pro se.
______________ ________________
Edward S. MacColl and Thompson, McNaboe, Ashley & Bull on brief
__________________ _________________________________
for appellee.
____________________
____________________
Per Curiam. Having reviewed the record and the parties'
__________
submissions, we find that the district court acted properly
in dismissing appellants' complaint for failure to state a
claim and in granting appellee's motion for summary judgment
on its counterclaim. The appellants' central claim--that
Federal Reserve Notes are not lawful currency and so cannot
be used as legal tender for private debts--is frivolous.1
We likewise find their subsidiary allegations to be without
merit, substantially for the reasons cited by the district
court.
The judgment is affirmed. Appellants' motion for stay
________________________________________________________
and appellee's renewed motion for summary disposition are
_____________________________________________________________
each denied as moot.
____________________
____________________
1. See, e.g., Juilliard v. Greenman, 110 U.S. 421, 448
___ ____ _________ ________
(1884) ("Congress is authorized to establish a national
currency, either in coin or in paper, and to make that
currency lawful money for all purposes, as regards the
national government or private individuals"); Edgar v. Inland
_____ ______
Steel Co., 744 F.2d 1276, 1278 n.4 (7th Cir. 1984) (per
__________
curiam) (rejecting argument that "federal reserve notes are
not money"); Foret v. Wilson, 725 F.2d 254, 254-55 (5th Cir.
_____ ______
1984) (per curiam) (rejecting argument that "only gold and
silver coin may be constituted legal tender"); United States
_____________
v. Ware, 608 F.2d 400, 402-04 (10th Cir. 1979); United States
____ _____________
v. Anderson, 584 F.2d 369, 374 (10th Cir. 1978); United
________ ______
States v. Schmitz, 542 F.2d 782, 785 (9th Cir. 1976), cert.
______ _______ _____
denied, 429 U.S. 1105 (1977); Milam v. United States, 524
______ _____ ______________
F.2d 629, 630 (9th Cir. 1974); see also Howe v. United
_________ ____ ______
States, 632 F. Supp. 700, 701 (D. Mass.), aff'd, 802 F.2d 440
______ _____
(1st Cir. 1986) (table), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1066 (1987).
____________
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Devore v. Federal Savings, (1st Cir. 1994).
Devore v. Federal Savings (Devore v. Federal Savings) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Juilliard v. Greenman
110 U.S. 421 (Supreme Court, 1884)
United States v. John Noehl Schmitz
542 F.2d 782 (Ninth Circuit, 1976)
United States v. Lowell G. Anderson
584 F.2d 369 (Tenth Circuit, 1978)
United States v. Omer W. Ware
608 F.2d 400 (Tenth Circuit, 1979)
Clarence P. Foret, Sr., and Earl J. Roussel v. Charles Connell Wilson, Sheriff, St. Charles Parish, State of Louisiana
725 F.2d 254 (Fifth Circuit, 1984)
Judy Edgar v. Inland Steel Company, a Corporation
744 F.2d 1276 (Seventh Circuit, 1984)
Howe v. United States
632 F. Supp. 700 (D. Massachusetts, 1986)