St. Clair E. Miller v. Hazel Lee Miller
This text of 296 F.2d 283 (St. Clair E. Miller v. Hazel Lee Miller) 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.
Opinion
St. Clair E. MILLER, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Hazel Lee MILLER, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 73.
Docket 27054.
United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.
Submitted November 3, 1961.
Decided November 21, 1961.
St. Clair E. Miller, plaintiff-appellant, pro se.
No appearance for defendant-appellee.
Before CLARK, HINCKS, and KAUFMAN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
This appeal from the denial of appellant's application for counsel to press his action for damages against his wife for procuring his confinement in a state mental institution while sane involves the same issues — parties, appealability, and the discretionary power of the judge in assigning counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) — as in the companion appeal against the hospital superintendent we are deciding herewith. Miller v. Pleasure, 2 Cir., 296 F.2d 283, decided this day. Except as to the one claim of governmental immunity not here available, the chances of any success at all for plaintiff in the action below seem as dubious here as we found them there. The judge exercised sound discretion in denying the application.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
296 F.2d 283, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/st-clair-e-miller-v-hazel-lee-miller-ca2-1961.