Legal Opinion
United States v. John M. Poindexter
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided September 30, 1988No. 88-3057, 88-3090, 88-3097, and 88-3105PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Before BUCKLEY, D.H. GINSBURG and SENTELLE, Circuit Judges.
Opinion PER CURIAM.
2Per curiam
Appellants John Poindexter, Oliver North and Albert Hakim have appealed various pre-trial orders of the district court. Appellants also seek extraordinary relief by way of mandamus. Arguing that the court is without jurisdiction to entertain the appeals, the United States has moved to dismiss. Because we agree that we are without jurisdiction to review the orders that are the subject of these interlocutory appeals, we grant the motions of the United States and…
3Cases cited23 opinions
- Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Coopers & Lybrand v. LivesaySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Kastigar v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Abney v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Kerr v. United States Dist. Court for Northern Dist. of Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by14 opinions
- Midland Asphalt Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Oliver L. North v. Lawrence E. Walsh, in His Official Capacities as "Independent Counsel" and "Independent Counsel: Iran/contra,"Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1989
- In Re Oliver L. North (Dutton Fee Application)Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1993
- In Re Oliver L. North (Shultz Fee Application)Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1993
- In Re Richard ThornburghCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1989
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.