Haag v. Cuyahoga County
This text of 798 F.2d 1414 (Haag v. Cuyahoga County) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
798 F.2d 1414
Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
Haag
v.
CUYAHOGA COUNTY, et al., Defendants-Appellees
No. 85-3633.
United States Court of Appeals,
Sixth Circuit.
July 29, 1986.
Before MILBURN and BOGGS, Circuit Judges, and DeMASCIO, District Judge.*
ORDER
This cause having come on to be heard upon the record, the briefs and the oral argument of the parties, and upon due consideration thereof,
The Court finds that no prejudicial error intervened in the judgment and proceedings in the District Court, and it is therefore ORDERED that said judgment be, and it hereby is, AFFIRMED.
The Honorable Robert E. DeMascio, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
798 F.2d 1414, 1986 WL 17279, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haag-v-cuyahoga-county-ca6-1986.