Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Jones v. Meade

Jones v. Meade, 510 F.2d 961 (2d Cir. 1975)

Type: Opinion
Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1975-02-10
Topic: general

PER CURIAM: The order of the district court is affirmed for the reasons set forth in Judge John R. Bartels’ opinion, 378 F.Supp. 286 (E.D.N.Y.1974).

Citator

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

Cited by: 6 opinions

JONES v. MEADE,510 F.2d 961(2nd Cir. 1975)

APPLICATION OF WILLIAM JONES ET AL., PETITIONERS-APPELLANTS, v. ROBERT C.

MEADE ET AL., FIRST RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES, HECTOR H. GAYLE, EXECUTIVE

DIRECTOR, ET AL., SECOND RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES, JOHN MAYLOTT AND GERALD B.

CRUISE, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, THIRD

RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES.

No. 528, Docket 74-2030.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Submitted January 9, 1975.

Decided February 10, 1975.

Robert Rivers, Westbury, N.Y., for petitioners-appellants.

Richard J. Osterndorf, Mineola, N.Y., for first respondents-appellees.

Ralph A. Nappi, Port Washington, N.Y., for second respondents-appellees.

Harold J. Friedman, Asst. U.S. Atty. (David G. Trager, U.S. Atty., E. D. N.Y., Paul B. Bergman, Asst. U.S. Atty., of counsel), for third respondents-appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

Before SMITH, OAKES and TIMBERS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

[1] The order of the district court is affirmed for the reasons set forth in Judge John R. Bartels' opinion, 378 F.Supp. 286 (E.D.N.Y. 1974).Page 1043