Paul S. Burka, Trustee and Robert A. Burka, Trustee v. Aetna Life Insurance Company, a Connecticut Corporation

107 F.3d 922, 323 U.S. App. D.C. 289, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 39754, 1996 WL 678497
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedOctober 22, 1996
Docket96-7052
StatusUnpublished

This text of 107 F.3d 922 (Paul S. Burka, Trustee and Robert A. Burka, Trustee v. Aetna Life Insurance Company, a Connecticut Corporation) 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
Paul S. Burka, Trustee and Robert A. Burka, Trustee v. Aetna Life Insurance Company, a Connecticut Corporation, 107 F.3d 922, 323 U.S. App. D.C. 289, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 39754, 1996 WL 678497 (D.C. Cir. 1996).

Opinion

107 F.3d 922

323 U.S.App.D.C. 289

NOTICE: D.C. Circuit Local Rule 11(c) states that unpublished orders, judgments, and explanatory memoranda may not be cited as precedents, but counsel may refer to unpublished dispositions when the binding or preclusive effect of the disposition, rather than its quality as precedent, is relevant.
Paul S. BURKA, Trustee and Robert A. Burka, Trustee, Appellants,
v.
AETNA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Connecticut Corporation, et
al., Appellees.

No. 96-7052.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Oct. 22, 1996.

Before WILLIAMS, ROGERS and TATEL, Circuit Judges.

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record before the United States district court for the District of Columbia, and on the briefs of counsel and oral argument before this court. The issues have been accorded full consideration by this court and occasion no need for a published opinion. See D.C.Cir.Rule 36(b).

Appellants challenge the district court's issuance of a preliminary injunction and denial of their motion to alter or amend that preliminary injunction. Substantially for the reasons of the district court, see Burka v. Aetna Life Ins. Co. 917 F.Supp. 8 (D.D.C.1996), it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED by this court that the judgment of the district court be affirmed.

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 41(a).

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

Related

Burka v. Aetna Life Insurance
917 F. Supp. 8 (District of Columbia, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
107 F.3d 922, 323 U.S. App. D.C. 289, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 39754, 1996 WL 678497, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paul-s-burka-trustee-and-robert-a-burka-trustee-v-aetna-life-insurance-cadc-1996.