Joseph Elkanich v. Myrl E. Alexander, Director of Bureau of Prisons and the United States

430 F.2d 1178
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit·Decided August 25, 1970·No. 175-70·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Elkanich was notified that the court was considering summary af-firmance, and thereafter appellee filed a motion to affirm, pursuant to Rule 8 of our Revised Rules, effective January 1, 1970. Although appellant was afforded an opportunity to oppose summary af-firmance, either as proposed by the court or by the appellee, he has not done so. Nonetheless, examination of the file and records in this cause prompts the conclusion that the questions presented are wholly unsubstantial and require no further argument. Accordingly, the motion of appellee is granted and the judgment of the district court is affirmed for the reasons stated in the Memorandum and Order of the district court, 315 F.Supp. 659 (D.Kan.1970).

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

Joseph Elkanich v. Myrl E. Alexander, Director of Bureau of Prisons and the United States, 430 F.2d 1178 (10th Cir. 1970).

430 F.2d 1178 (Joseph Elkanich v. Myrl E. Alexander, Director of Bureau of Prisons and the United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ramos v. Lamm
639 F.2d 559 (Tenth Circuit, 1980)
United States v. Jesse Lee Evans
542 F.2d 805 (Tenth Circuit, 1976)
Wagner v. Simon
412 F. Supp. 426 (W.D. Missouri, 1975)