Robert Fritz v. Director of Veterans Administration, Etc.
Robert FRITZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DIRECTOR OF VETERANS ADMINISTRATION, Etc., Defendant-Appellee
Opinion
PER CURIAM:
We have carefully considered the appellant’s brief and the clarification of appellant’s position presented to us by him at oral argument, acting in pro. per. Appellant has had a full opportunity to present his claims to the District Court and to us. However, neither the District Court nor this court has been authorized *155 by any Act of Congress to decide the merits of appellant’s claim. On the contrary, Congress, by the enactment of 38 U.S.C. § 211 (a) has expressly deprived the courts of any jurisdiction to do so. Under the circumstances, the District Court had no choice; the law required it to dismiss the action. The same law requires us to affirm the judgment. No possible benefit can come to appellant by the continuance of this litigation. It should now be brought to a close. For the same reason, appellant’s motion, filed October 27, 1969, must be denied.
The judgment is affirmed. The motion is denied.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.