Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Cliett v. Hammonds

265 F.2d 933

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1959-05-05
Topic
general

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Scott v. Smith, 5 Cir., 84 F.2d 489; Cliett v. Scott, 5 Cir., 102 F.2d 725; and Cliett v.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Cliett v. Hammonds. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
3 opinions
CLIETT v. HAMMONDS,265 F.2d 933(5th Cir. 1959)
Irene Smith CLIETT and Lucy Mayberry, Appellants, v. Mamie Scott HAMMONDS
et al., Appellees.
No. 17476.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
May 5, 1959.
Rehearing Denied June 29, 1959.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas; Joe M. Ingraham, Judge.
Sam R. Fisher, Houston, Tex., for appellants.

W.H. Betts, Hempstead, Tex., George L. McGhee, Houston, Tex., for appellees.
Before HUTCHESON, Chief Judge, and TUTTLE and BROWN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. Scott v. Smith, 5 Cir.,84 F.2d 489; Cliett v. Scott, 5 Cir.,102 F.2d 725; and Cliett v. Scott, 5 Cir.,233 F.2d 269.Page 934Page 1