Dickson v. Hotchkin

Fifth Circuit

Dickson v. Hotchkin

202 F.2d 426, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 3251

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMarch 11, 1953

Docket14122

StatusPublished

This text of 202 F.2d 426 (Dickson v. Hotchkin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dickson v. Hotchkin, 202 F.2d 426, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 3251 (5th Cir. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In the complaint in the district court the appellants claimed a legal right to participate in the proceedings of the P.epublican Precinct Convention in Precinct No. 50, Bexar County, Texas, without signing a declaration reading as follows: “I am a Republican, and desire to participate in the Republican Party activities in the year 1952.” They sought to enforce the claimed right by declaratory judgment, mandamus, and injunction, and also claimed $100,000.00 as damages for the alleged wrongful acts of the appelloe* whereby they alleged that they would be tlenied such right. The Republican Precinct Convention in that precinct was held on May 3, 1952 and all questions presented by this action are now clearly moot, except possibly the claim for damages. The claim for damages, certainly as of the date of the filing of the complaint before the convention was held, is not substantial, and does not merit the attention of the court. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed because the matter is moot.

Dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM.

In the complaint in the district court the appellants claimed a legal right to participate in the proceedings of the P.epublican Precinct Convention in Precinct No. 50, Bexar County, Texas, without signing a declaration reading as follows: “I am a Republican, and desire to participate in the Republican Party activities in the year 1952.” They sought to enforce the claimed right by declaratory judgment, mandamus, and injunction, and also claimed $100,000.00 as damages for the alleged wrongful acts of the appelloe* whereby they alleged that they would be tlenied such right. The Republican Precinct Convention in that precinct was held on May 3, 1952 and all questions presented by this action are now clearly moot, except possibly the claim for damages. The claim for damages, certainly as of the date of the filing of the complaint before the convention was held, is not substantial, and does not merit the attention of the court. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed because the matter is moot.

Dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 F.2d 426, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 3251, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dickson-v-hotchkin-ca5-1953.