Legal Opinion
Harold Woolsey v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of Corrections
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided June 24, 1969No. 27308PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Per curiam
Pursuant to new Rule 18 of the Rules of this court, we have concluded on the merits that this case is of such character as not to justify oral argument and have directed the clerk to place the case on the Summary Calendar and to notify the parties in writing. See Murphy v. Houma Well Service, 5 Cir., 1969, 409 F.2d 804, Part I.
This case was previously before this Court in Woolsey v. Beto, 387 F.2d 138, and on December 27, 1967, upon appel-lee’s motion was remanded to the District Court for further development of facts, and with a suggestion that the District Court make findings of fact and…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Ex Parte YoungCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1967
- Patricia Lebouef Murphy, as Administratrix of the Estate of Edward Fontenot, Deceased, Etc. v. Houma Well Service, and Eva C. Fontenot, IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- The State of Texas and Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of Corrections v. Melvin Alexander PaytonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1968
- Clemmon D. Waters v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1968
- William E. Lydy v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1968
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Antonio Vera v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970
- Vern Wilmer Carpenter v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970