Oakley v. Summerfield

231 F.2d 775
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedMarch 29, 1956
DocketNos. 12918, 12971, 13033
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 231 F.2d 775 (Oakley v. Summerfield) 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
Oakley v. Summerfield, 231 F.2d 775 (D.C. Cir. 1956).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This litigation is similar to the Tour-lanes cases (Tourlanes Publishing Co. v. Summerfield), 97 U.S.App.D.C. -, 231 F.2d 773. Oakley is a photographer and not a publisher. However, he sells numerous admittedly innocuous books and publications, in addition to the photographs found by the Post Office Department to be obscene. The judgment of [776]*776the District Court, which was similar to its order in Tourlanes, will likewise be affirmed (No. 12,971). During oral argument, counsel for Oakley made the same statement concerning his cross-appeal as was made by counsel for Tour-lanes. On a like basis, the appeals by Oakley will be dismissed (Nos. 12,918 and 13,023).

So ordered.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
231 F.2d 775, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oakley-v-summerfield-cadc-1956.