ROY A. OAKLEY ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
ARTHUR E. SUMMERFIELD, POSTMASTER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, ET AL., APPELLEES; ARTHUR E. SUMMERFIELD, POSTMASTER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, ET AL., APPELLANTS, V. ROY A. OAKLEY ET AL., APPELLEES; ROY A. OAKLEY ET AL., APPELLANTS, V. ARTHUR E. SUMMERFIELD, POSTMASTER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES ET AL., APPELLEES
ROY A. OAKLEY ET AL., APPELLANTS,
ARTHUR E. SUMMERFIELD, POSTMASTER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, ET AL., APPELLEES; ARTHUR E. SUMMERFIELD, POSTMASTER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, ET AL., APPELLANTS, V. ROY A. OAKLEY ET AL., APPELLEES; ROY A. OAKLEY ET AL., APPELLANTS, V. ARTHUR E. SUMMERFIELD, POSTMASTER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES ET AL., APPELLEES
231 F.2d 775
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (1956)
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
This litigation is similar to the Tour-lanes cases (Tourlanes Publishing Co. v. Summerfield), 97 U.S.App.D.C. -, 231 F. 2d 773. Oakley is a photographer and not a publisher. However, he sells numerous admittedly innocuous books and publications, in addition to the photographs found by the Post Office Department to be obscene. The judgment of the District Court, which was similar to its order in Tourlanes, will likewise be affirmed (No. 12,971). During oral argument, counsel for Oakley made the same statement concerning his cross-appeal as was made by counsel for Tour-lanes. On a like basis, the appeals by Oakley will be dismissed (Nos. 12,918 and 13,023).
So ordered.