TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Alex Cooley, Etc. v. William Baer Endictor, Assistant Solicitor of the Criminal Court of Fulton County

Alex COOLEY Et Al., Etc., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. William Baer ENDICTOR, Assistant Solicitor of the Criminal Court of Fulton County, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees

Cooley v. Endictor, 458 F.2d 513 (5th Cir. 1972)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
May 22, 1972
Docket
No. 71-3207
Judges
Bell, Simpson, Morgan
Citations
458 F.2d 513

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

The district court denied both injunctive and declaratory relief against claimed threatened state court prosecution 1 of the producer and two female performers of a theatrical production “Stomp”. 2 A fourth plaintiff was joined as a member of the theatre-going public.

The trial court entered full findings of fact and conclusions of law, basing its holding primarily upon Boyle v. Landry, 1971, 401 U.S. 77 , 91 S.Ct. 758 , 27 L.Ed.2d 696 , and the other cases composing the Younger v. Harris, 1971, 401 U.S. 37 , 91 S.Ct. 746 , 27 L.Ed.2d 669 , double trilogy of February 23, 1971.

Appellants have not demonstrated error in the proceedings below.

The judgment appealed from is

Affirmed.

. Under Georgia’s indecent exposure statute, Ga.Code Ann. Sec. 26-2105; Ga.L. 1971, page 344.

. The opinion and order of the district court are reported as Cooley et al. v. Endictor et al., N.D.Ga.1971, 340 F.Supp. 15 .

On Rehearing — Per Curiam

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC PER CURIAM:

The Petition for Rehearing is denied and no member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc, (Rule 35 Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 12) the Petition for Rehearing En Bane is denied.

Combined text as published — syllabus, headnotes and all opinions in one document

458 F.2d 513

Alex COOLEY et al., etc., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. William Baer ENDICTOR, Assistant Solicitor of the Criminal Court of Fulton County, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 71-3207.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 3, 1972. Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied May 22, 1972.

Morris Brown, Charles Morgan, Jr., Norman Siegel, Emily Carssow, Neil Bradley, Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Thomas E. Moran, Thomas R. Moran, Hinson McAuliffe, Sol. Gen., Criminal Court of Fulton County, Atlanta, Ga., Ralph H. Witt, Henry L. Bowden, Atlanta, Ga., William Baer Endictor, Asst. Sol. Gen., Criminal Court of Fulton County, Atlanta, Ga., for defendants-appellees.

Before BELL, SIMPSON and MORGAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

The district court denied both injunctive and declaratory relief against claimed threatened state court prosecution 1 of the producer and two female performers of a theatrical production "Stomp". 2 A fourth plaintiff was joined as a member of the theatre-going public.

2

The trial court entered full findings of fact and conclusions of law, basing its holding primarily upon Boyle v. Landry, 1971, 401 U.S. 77 , 91 S.Ct. 758 , 27 L.Ed.2d 696 , and the other cases composing the Younger v. Harris, 1971, 401 U.S. 37 , 91 S.Ct. 746 , 27 L.Ed.2d 669 , double trilogy of February 23, 1971.

3

Appellants have not demonstrated error in the proceedings below.

4

The judgment appealed from is Affirmed.

5

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

PER CURIAM:

6

The Petition for Rehearing is denied and no member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc, (Rule 35 Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 12) the Petition for Rehearing En Banc is denied.

1

Under Georgia's indecent exposure statute, Ga.Code Ann. Sec. 26-2105; Ga.L. 1971, page 344 2

The opinion and order of the district court are reported as Cooley et al. v. Endictor et al., N.D.Ga.1971, 340 F.Supp. 15

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1972: 31973: 219722026peak 1972 · 3

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 3

DepthCaseCited by
Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971) 14,070
Boyle v. Landry, 401 U.S. 77 (1971) 317
Cooley v. Endictor, 340 F. Supp. 15 (N.D. Ga. 1971) 2

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