J. HOWARD ARNOLD, APPELLANT,
v.
WILLIAM J. MCGUINESS, APPELLEE
J. HOWARD ARNOLD, APPELLANT,
WILLIAM J. MCGUINESS, APPELLEE
400 F.2d 392
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (1968)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:
We have carefully considered appellant’s assignments of error and they have no merit. We agree with and adopt the decision of the district court.1 We also reaffirm this Court’s prior decisions, wherein J. Howard Arnold was twice before this Court as the appellant.2
Affirmed.
. See Memorandum and Order filed February 2, 1967, Arnold v. McGuiness, U.S. D.O. N.D.Calif., 289 F.Supp. 210.
. See Arnold v. Bostick, 9 Cir., 1964, 339 F. 2d 879, cert. den. 382 U.S. 858, 86 S. Ct. 113, 15 L.Ed.2d 96; unreported Order in Arnold v. McGuiness, 9 Cir., 1966, No. 20617, cert. den. 386 U.S. 996, 87 S.Ct. 1315, 18 D.Ed.2d 343.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Tobias Q. Poole v. Perini, 659 F.2d 730 (6th Cir. 1981)
Authorities Cited
- Stein v. Wirtz, 386 U.S. 996 (U.S. 1967)
- Pritchett v. Florida, 386 U.S. 996 (U.S. 1967)
- Arnold v. Bostick, 339 F.2d 879 (9th Cir. 1964)
- Fields v. California, 382 U.S. 858 (U.S. 1965)
- Olson v. Tahash, 382 U.S. 858 (U.S. 1965)