Marvin Hammon, Joseph L. Smith v. Sharon Pratt Dixon, Mayor

946 F.2d 1564

• Court: Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
• Decided: January 28, 1992
• Docket: 91-7010
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

946 F.2d 1564

292 U.S.App.D.C. 84

NOTICE: D.C. Circuit Local Rule 11(c) states that unpublished orders, judgments, and explanatory memoranda may not be cited as precedents, but counsel may refer to unpublished dispositions when the binding or preclusive effect of the disposition, rather than its quality as precedent, is relevant.
Marvin HAMMON, et al., Joseph L. Smith, et al., Appellants,
v.
Sharon Pratt DIXON, Mayor, et al.

No. 91-7010.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Aug. 30, 1991.
Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied Jan. 28, 1992.

Before BUCKLEY, SENTELLE and HENDERSON, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the motion to dismiss, or, in the alternative, for summary affirmance, the response thereto, and the reply, it is

ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance be granted substantially for the reasons stated by the district court in its November 6, 1990 opinion. The merits of the parties' positions are so clear as to justify summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C.Cir.1987) (per curiam); Walker v. Washington, 627 F.2d 541, 545 (D.C.Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 994 (1980).

The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C.Cir. Rule 15.