HANLON

v.

NEW YORK

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Thomas, 291 F.2d 478 (6th Cir. 1961)
  …F. 2d 210, 212. This Court has also indicated since the ruling in the Bishop case that the question can be raised in a Section 2255 proceeding as well as by a Section 4245 proceeding. Davis v. United States, 6 Cir., 270 F. 2d 177, certiorari denied 361 U.S. 852, 80 S.Ct. 113, 4 L.Ed.2d 91. Accordingly, we hold that the question of appellant’s mental competency at the time of the trial was raised by the present proceeding under Section 2255. But Section 2255 does not require an examination of appellant’s m…
• Prostrollo v. The Univ. OF S.D., 507 F.2d 775 (8th Cir. 1974)
  …vered evidence.” After the district court refused to vacate its judgment, the record was certified back to this court. No new notice of appeal is required under this procedure. Serio v. Badger Mutual Ins. Co., 266 F. 2d 418 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 852, 80 S.Ct. 81, 4 L.Ed.2d 73 (1959). . We can only assume that the rule requiring students to live in the dormitory was promulgated in compliance with the legislative direction. See note 4, supra. School officials cannot in this day and age be faulte…
• Nat'l Mar. Union v. Aquaslide 'N' Dive Corp., 737 F.2d 1395 (5th Cir. 1984)
  …and has been consistently applied in this and other circuits. United States v. Hall, 472 F. 2d 261, 265 (5th Cir.1972); Stewart v. Dunn, 363 F. 2d 591, 598-99 (5th Cir.1966); Bigelow v. United States, 267 F. 2d 398 (9th Cir.), cert. [*1400] denied, 361 U.S. 852, 80 S.Ct. 113, 4 L.Ed.2d 91 (1959). Here, there was no challenge raised in the district court as to that court’s jurisdiction to enter an injunction governing the conduct of strikers and workers at the Aquaslide plant site. Indeed, it was .the NMU…