Stanley v. Tucker v. William R. Moller, Edmund T. Curran, Regnier, Moller & Taylor, a Partnership, John Does, A, B, C, and D

Second Circuit

Stanley v. Tucker v. William R. Moller, Edmund T. Curran, Regnier, Moller & Taylor, a Partnership, John Does, A, B, C, and D

445 F.2d 1400

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedApril 9, 1971

Docket35685

StatusPublished

This text of 445 F.2d 1400 (Stanley v. Tucker v. William R. Moller, Edmund T. Curran, Regnier, Moller & Taylor, a Partnership, John Does, A, B, C, and D) 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

Stanley v. Tucker v. William R. Moller, Edmund T. Curran, Regnier, Moller & Taylor, a Partnership, John Does, A, B, C, and D, 445 F.2d 1400 (2d Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

445 F.2d 1400

Stanley V. TUCKER, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
William R. MOLLER, Edmund T. Curran, Regnier, Moller &
Taylor, a Partnership, John Does, A, B, C, and D,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 716, Docket 35685.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued March 19, 1971.
Decided April 9, 1971.

Stanley V. Tucker, pro se.

Peter C. Schwartz, Hartford, Conn. (Gordon, Muir & Fitzgerald, Hartford, Conn.), for defendants-appellees.

Before MOORE and SMITH, Circuit Judges, and TIMBERS,1 District judge.

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, appeals from dismissal by the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, M. Joseph Blumenfeld, Judge, (D.Conn.1970) of his civil action against attorneys representing opposing parties in actions attacking the constitutionality of Connecticut attachment statutes. We affirm on the opinion of Judge Blumenfeld below, for lack of action 'under color of state law' to base claims under the civil rights statutes.

1

Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, sitting by designation

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

445 F.2d 1400

Stanley V. TUCKER, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
William R. MOLLER, Edmund T. Curran, Regnier, Moller &
Taylor, a Partnership, John Does, A, B, C, and D,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 716, Docket 35685.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued March 19, 1971.
Decided April 9, 1971.

Stanley V. Tucker, pro se.

Peter C. Schwartz, Hartford, Conn. (Gordon, Muir & Fitzgerald, Hartford, Conn.), for defendants-appellees.

Before MOORE and SMITH, Circuit Judges, and TIMBERS,1 District judge.

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, appeals from dismissal by the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, M. Joseph Blumenfeld, Judge, (D.Conn.1970) of his civil action against attorneys representing opposing parties in actions attacking the constitutionality of Connecticut attachment statutes. We affirm on the opinion of Judge Blumenfeld below, for lack of action 'under color of state law' to base claims under the civil rights statutes.

1

Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, sitting by designation

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

445 F.2d 1400, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stanley-v-tucker-v-william-r-moller-edmund-t-curran-regnier-moller-ca2-1971.