Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Miles Christman v. Albert Skinner

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided October 30, 1972No. 1, Docket 72-1055Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partFeinberg, Circuit Judge

I dissent from so much of the majority opinion as affirms dismissal of the first, third and fourth causes of action. I fully appreciate the time-consuming burden that this and similar cases impose on our district courts and have suggested that federal legislation to deal with the problem may be appropriate.1 In the absence of a legislative solution, however — particularly when this case must now be tried in any event on the second and fifth causes of action — I cannot agree that the problem should be solved by a rigid construction of the pleadings or by misapplied principles of qualified…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Monroe v. PapeSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  3. Pierson v. RaySupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Johnson v. AverySupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  5. United States v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1971

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API