Gordon v. Gray

D.C. Circuit

Gordon v. Gray

193 F.2d 367, 90 U.S. App. D.C. 33, 1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 2902

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedNovember 15, 1951

Docket10617

StatusPublished

This text of 193 F.2d 367 (Gordon v. Gray) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gordon v. Gray, 193 F.2d 367, 90 U.S. App. D.C. 33, 1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 2902 (D.C. Cir. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Gordon brought a civil action for mandamus to require appellee Government officials to supply him with copies of certain papers. He was an officer in the Army and had been arrested and confined for a time without charges being preferred or a court martial ordered. An Army regulation 1 provides that under such circumstances a copy of all papers will be sent to the officer arrested or confined. Subsequently appellant’s Army records were corrected to show an honorable separation from duty, eligibility for promotion from Lieutenant Colonel to Colonel, and that the revocation of his reserve commission was erroneous; he was given an honorable discharge and the reserve commission to which he was entitled. In his motion to dismiss this appeal as moot, appellee Witsell (for whom his successor in office, Bergin, has since been substituted) showed that, in a civil action for slander brought by appellant in the District Court in connection with these same matters, an official of the War Department took the witness stand and testified as to the contents of the papers here involved, in so far as they did not involve matters affecting national security. Thus is appears that all substantive objectives which could be served by a writ of mandamus have been served. The action is therefore moot.

*368 Appellee Gray resigned from office, and his successor was not substituted as a party. The action is therefore dismissed as to Gray on that ground. Appellee Wit-sell also resigned from office, but the action was maintained against his successor. 2 Dismissed.

1

. Army Regulation 600-355, par. 6b, promulgated July 17,1942.

2

Fed. Rules Civ. Proc. rule 25(d), 28 U.S.C.A.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Gordon brought a civil action for mandamus to require appellee Government officials to supply him with copies of certain papers. He was an officer in the Army and had been arrested and confined for a time without charges being preferred or a court martial ordered. An Army regulation 1 provides that under such circumstances a copy of all papers will be sent to the officer arrested or confined. Subsequently appellant’s Army records were corrected to show an honorable separation from duty, eligibility for promotion from Lieutenant Colonel to Colonel, and that the revocation of his reserve commission was erroneous; he was given an honorable discharge and the reserve commission to which he was entitled. In his motion to dismiss this appeal as moot, appellee Witsell (for whom his successor in office, Bergin, has since been substituted) showed that, in a civil action for slander brought by appellant in the District Court in connection with these same matters, an official of the War Department took the witness stand and testified as to the contents of the papers here involved, in so far as they did not involve matters affecting national security. Thus is appears that all substantive objectives which could be served by a writ of mandamus have been served. The action is therefore moot.

*368 Appellee Gray resigned from office, and his successor was not substituted as a party. The action is therefore dismissed as to Gray on that ground. Appellee Wit-sell also resigned from office, but the action was maintained against his successor. 2 Dismissed.

1

. Army Regulation 600-355, par. 6b, promulgated July 17,1942.

2

Fed. Rules Civ. Proc. rule 25(d), 28 U.S.C.A.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

193 F.2d 367, 90 U.S. App. D.C. 33, 1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 2902, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gordon-v-gray-cadc-1951.