Laszlo Habda v. Jack Wysocker, Esq

Third Circuit

Laszlo Habda v. Jack Wysocker, Esq

458 F.2d 537, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9818

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedMay 1, 1972

Docket71-1428

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 458 F.2d 537 (Laszlo Habda v. Jack Wysocker, Esq) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Laszlo Habda v. Jack Wysocker, Esq, 458 F.2d 537, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9818 (3d Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

Appellant’s civil action for damages against his former attorney alleges that the attorney in a criminal case in a state court neglected to challenge the legal sufficiency of an indictment. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendant on the ground that there was no federal jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1343. On the authority of Thomas v. Howard, 455 F.2d 228 (3d Cir., filed Feb. 9, 1972), we affirm.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

Appellant’s civil action for damages against his former attorney alleges that the attorney in a criminal case in a state court neglected to challenge the legal sufficiency of an indictment. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendant on the ground that there was no federal jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1343. On the authority of Thomas v. Howard, 455 F.2d 228 (3d Cir., filed Feb. 9, 1972), we affirm.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

458 F.2d 537, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9818, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/laszlo-habda-v-jack-wysocker-esq-ca3-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack