Spiesel v. City of New York

Second Circuit

Spiesel v. City of New York

342 F.2d 800

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMarch 30, 1965

DocketNo. 371, Docket 29398

StatusPublished

This text of 342 F.2d 800 (Spiesel v. City of New York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Spiesel v. City of New York, 342 F.2d 800 (2d Cir. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Charles Spiesel appeals from an order of the District Court for the Southern District of New York, Edward C. McLean, District Judge, dismissing on defendant’s motion, plaintiff’s complaint seeking damages against the City of New York for alleged actions of various unnamed police officers and sales tax personnel, on the ground that the complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We agree with the district court’s ruling on that branch of defendant’s motion and affirm the judgment dismissing the action, D.C., 239 F.Supp. 106.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Charles Spiesel appeals from an order of the District Court for the Southern District of New York, Edward C. McLean, District Judge, dismissing on defendant’s motion, plaintiff’s complaint seeking damages against the City of New York for alleged actions of various unnamed police officers and sales tax personnel, on the ground that the complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We agree with the district court’s ruling on that branch of defendant’s motion and affirm the judgment dismissing the action, D.C., 239 F.Supp. 106.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

342 F.2d 800, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spiesel-v-city-of-new-york-ca2-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack