Phyllis Wright Harris, on Her Own Behalf and on Behalf of Her Three Children Beverly Harris Butler, Formerly Beverly Harris Samuel Harris v. Joint School District No. 241 Board of Trustees of District No. 241 Trent Woods, Chairperson of Board Al Arnzen, Superintendent v. Citizens Preserving America's Heritage, Inc., an Idaho Corporation, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellees
This text of 62 F.3d 1233 (Phyllis Wright Harris, on Her Own Behalf and on Behalf of Her Three Children Beverly Harris Butler, Formerly Beverly Harris Samuel Harris v. Joint School District No. 241 Board of Trustees of District No. 241 Trent Woods, Chairperson of Board Al Arnzen, Superintendent v. Citizens Preserving America's Heritage, Inc., an Idaho Corporation, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellees) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
62 F.3d 1233
102 Ed. Law Rep. 491, 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6352,
95 Daily Journal D.A.R. 10,854
Phyllis Wright HARRIS, on her own behalf and on behalf of
her three children; Beverly Harris Butler,
formerly Beverly Harris; Samuel Harris,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 241; Board of Trustees of
District No. 241; Trent Woods, Chairperson of
Board; Al Arnzen, Superintendent,
Defendants-Appellees,
v.
CITIZENS PRESERVING AMERICA'S HERITAGE, INC., an Idaho
Corporation, et al., Defendants-Intervenors-Appellees.
No. 93-35839.
United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.
Aug. 11, 1995.
On Remand from the United States Supreme Court.
Before: WRIGHT, WIGGINS, and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
Pursuant to the orders of the United States Supreme Court, Joint Sch. Dist. 241 v. Harris, --- U.S. ----, 115 S.Ct. 2604, 132 L.Ed.2d 849 (1995), and Citizens Preserving America's Heritage, Inc. v. Harris, --- U.S. ----, 115 S.Ct. 2604, 132 L.Ed.2d 849 (1995), the opinion of this court, reported at 41 F.3d 447 (9th Cir.1994), is vacated, and the appeal is dismissed as moot. See United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36, 71 S.Ct. 104, 95 L.Ed. 36 (1950).
The case is remanded to the district court with instructions to vacate its judgment and dismiss the complaint as moot. See Great Western Sugar Co. v. Nelson, 442 U.S. 92, 93-94, 99 S.Ct. 2149, 2149-50, 60 L.Ed.2d 735 (1979).
Appellants' motion for fees is denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
62 F.3d 1233, 95 Daily Journal DAR 10854, 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6352, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 21617, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phyllis-wright-harris-on-her-own-behalf-and-on-behalf-of-her-three-ca9-1995.