TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Evan J. Henry, Representing Himself and All Other Taxpayers Similarly Affected v. Department of Housing and Urban Development (Hud), Washington, D. C.

Evan J. HENRY, Representing Himself and All Other Taxpayers Similarly Affected, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD), WASHINGTON, D. C., Et Al., Appellees

Henry v. Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev. (Hud), Wash., D. C., 451 F.2d 355 (8th Cir. 1971)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
November 23, 1971
Docket
No. 71-1410
Judges
Gibson, Heaney, Per Curiam, Van Pelt
Citations
451 F.2d 3551971 U.S. App. LEXIS 6964

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

The decision of the United States District Court dismissing the appellant’s complaint on its merits and with prejudice is affirmed for the reason that the complaint does not state a cause of action.

The appellant requests on appeal that this Court give him permission to amend his complaint. He requests, further, that we give an opinion on the following questions: (1) the constitutionality of Minnesota Statute 462.585 Subd. 4; (2) the validity of a contract between the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Winona (HRA); (8) the validity of a contract between HRA and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and (4) the validity of a contract between the HRA and Plaza Development Corporated dated July 13, 1971. He also asks us to decide whether further urban renewal planning or substantial modification of present redevelopment plans are void unless approved by the City Council of Winona and, by referendum, by the people of Winona.

This Court does not have jurisdiction to permit the plaintiff to amend his complaint and may not give advisory opinions on matters not raised before the District Court.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

2008: 12020: 120082026peak 2008 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. In re Greg Abbott956 F.3d 696 (5th Cir. 2020)
  2. Chad DuBois v. Robert Dooley277 F. App'x 651 (8th Cir. 2008)

Most recent

  1. In re Greg Abbott956 F.3d 696 (5th Cir. 2020)
  2. Chad DuBois v. Robert Dooley277 F. App'x 651 (8th Cir. 2008)

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.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list