PAT HUDSON AND WILLIAM CHARLES DEICH, III, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS,
v.
JOSEPH WANICK, IN HIS CAPACITY AS CITY ATTORNEY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES

5th Cir. | 1971-06-17
No. 71-1374
444 F.2d 218 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1971) Negative Treatment
Cited by 12 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

The District Court’s order dismissing the complaint is affirmed, but modified by striking from the last paragraph thereof the words “with prejudice.” The record discloses that the local prosecution was not undertaken in bad faith; also, that while a hearing was held on plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order — which was denied — the District Court did not reach the merits of the case, but dismissed the complaint. It was appropriate to dismiss the suit under the principles set forth in the recent and supervening decisions of the Supreme Court in Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 91 S.Ct. 746, 27 L.Ed.2d 669 (1971); Perez v. Ledesma, 401 U.S. 82, 91 S.Ct. 674, 27 L.Ed.2d 701 (1971), and companion cases, but proper disposition requires that the order be modified as noted above. See Star-Satellite, Inc. v. Rosetti, 5 Cir., 1971, 441 F. 2d 650; Peoples v. City of Birmingham, 5 Cir., 1971, 440 F. 2d 1352; Gordon v. Landrieu, 5 Cir., 1971, 442 F. 2d 926.

Affirmed as modified.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw