Partlo v. Johanns

D.C. Circuit

Partlo v. Johanns

224 F. App'x 7

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedApril 24, 2007

DocketNos. 06-5233, 06-5243

StatusPublished

This text of 224 F. App'x 7 (Partlo v. Johanns) 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

Partlo v. Johanns, 224 F. App'x 7 (D.C. Cir. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

JUDGMENT

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs by the parties and oral arguments of counsel. The court has accorded the issues full consideration and has determined that they do not warrant a published opinion. See D.C. CIR. R. 36(b). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the judgment of the District Court be affirmed.

Robert Partió and Roger Pringle appeal the District Court’s ruling denying their challenge to a program rule of the United States Department of Agriculture’s 2001/2002 Crop Loss Disaster Assistance Program preventing them from receiving a special, higher assistance rate based upon their cultivation practices. Finding no error in the District Court’s decision, we affirm the judgment from which this appeal was taken, for the reasons stated by the District Court.

The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc. See Fed. RApp. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. R. 41.

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

JUDGMENT

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs by the parties and oral arguments of counsel. The court has accorded the issues full consideration and has determined that they do not warrant a published opinion. See D.C. CIR. R. 36(b). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the judgment of the District Court be affirmed.

Robert Partió and Roger Pringle appeal the District Court’s ruling denying their challenge to a program rule of the United States Department of Agriculture’s 2001/2002 Crop Loss Disaster Assistance Program preventing them from receiving a special, higher assistance rate based upon their cultivation practices. Finding no error in the District Court’s decision, we affirm the judgment from which this appeal was taken, for the reasons stated by the District Court.

The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc. See Fed. RApp. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. R. 41.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

224 F. App'x 7, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/partlo-v-johanns-cadc-2007.