Doris Louise Allen v. Honorable William Harold Cox, Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi

Fifth Circuit

Doris Louise Allen v. Honorable William Harold Cox, Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi

387 F.2d 388, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 4203

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedDecember 12, 1967

Docket25046

StatusPublished

This text of 387 F.2d 388 (Doris Louise Allen v. Honorable William Harold Cox, Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi) 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

Doris Louise Allen v. Honorable William Harold Cox, Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, 387 F.2d 388, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 4203 (5th Cir. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

It having been represented to the Court on oral argument that discovery proceedings in this cause have not been but can be completed by petitioners in the District Court by January 30, 1968, which is prior to the next regular term of the District Court for the trial of causes, and that certain motions pertaining to further discovery have been and will be filed in the District Court by petitioners;

It is upon consideration ordered that the petition for writ of prohibition or mandamus is denied, without prejudice, however, to the petitioners’ application to the District Court under the rules thereof, and upon good cause shown, for an extension of time for discovery.

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

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

PER CURIAM:

It having been represented to the Court on oral argument that discovery proceedings in this cause have not been but can be completed by petitioners in the District Court by January 30, 1968, which is prior to the next regular term of the District Court for the trial of causes, and that certain motions pertaining to further discovery have been and will be filed in the District Court by petitioners;

It is upon consideration ordered that the petition for writ of prohibition or mandamus is denied, without prejudice, however, to the petitioners’ application to the District Court under the rules thereof, and upon good cause shown, for an extension of time for discovery.

The mandate shall issue forthwith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

387 F.2d 388, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 4203, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doris-louise-allen-v-honorable-william-harold-cox-judge-of-the-united-ca5-1967.