Penny Creaton v. Margaret Heckler

Ninth Circuit

Penny Creaton v. Margaret Heckler

781 F.2d 1430, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 22202

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided February 7, 1986·No. 85-6019·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinions

ORDER

Plaintiffs move to dismiss their interlocutory appeal from the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction. We fail to see any circumstances “which demand, in the interests of justice, that this court deny appellant’s motion to voluntarily dismiss.” See Shellman v. United States Lines, Inc., 528 F.2d 675, 678 (9th Cir.1975). In dismissing the appeal, we simply accept plaintiffs’ decision to proceed to trial without interim relief from the district court. Therefore, the motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to Fed.R.App.P. 42(b) is granted.

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

ORDER

Plaintiffs move to dismiss their interlocutory appeal from the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction. We fail to see any circumstances “which demand, in the interests of justice, that this court deny appellant’s motion to voluntarily dismiss.” See Shellman v. United States Lines, Inc., 528 F.2d 675, 678 (9th Cir.1975). In dismissing the appeal, we simply accept plaintiffs’ decision to proceed to trial without interim relief from the district court. Therefore, the motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to Fed.R.App.P. 42(b) is granted.

Penny Creaton v. Margaret Heckler, 781 F.2d 1430, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 22202 (9th Cir. 1986).

Pincite

781 F.2d 1430 (Penny Creaton v. Margaret Heckler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related