Fair v. Sebesta, 72-3301
| Decision Date | 11 April 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 72-3301,72-3300 Summary Calendar.,72-3301 |
| Citation | 475 F.2d 1140 |
| Parties | Jim FAIR and Jim Hinnant, both Individually and as representative of the class of similarly situated residents of of the State of Florida, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Jim SEBESTA, as Supervisor of Elections, Hillsborough County, Florida, etc., et al., Defendants-Appellants. Joel Francis WOODMAN, Individually, and Joel Francis Woodman, as representative of the class, etc., et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. James SEBESTA, Supervisor of Elections, Hillsborough County, Florida, et al., Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Jerry E. Oxner, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, Fla., David W. Thorpe, Asst. County Atty., Tampa, Fla., for James Sebesta.
Jim Fair, pro se.
Leslie Harold Levinson, Gainesville, Fla., Richard P. Condon, Tampa, Fla., for Hinnant.
Before THORNBERRY, GOLDBERG and RONEY, Circuit Judges.
We find that these consolidated cases require a three-judge district court, 28 U.S.C. § 2281. We therefore vacate the decision of the lower court, 346 F.Supp. 913, for want of jurisdiction and remand the cases with instructions to convene a three-judge district court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2284.
Vacated and remanded.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hinnant v. Sebesta, 72-440-Civ-T-H and 72-443-Civ-T-H.
...constituted. It therefore vacated the decision of the single judge and remanded the case to the District Court. Fair and Hinnant v. Sebesta, 475 F.2d 1140 (5th Cir. 1973). Chief Judge Brown then convened this three-judge court and the case was reargued. We find, as the single District Judge......
-
Meyers v. Jackson, LR-74-C-320.
...346 F.Supp. 913. There was an appeal, and the Court of Appeals directed that a three Judge court be convened. Fair and Hinnant v. Sebesta, 5 Cir., 1973, 475 F.2d 1140. The decision in the Florida case cited in the text hereof is that of the statutory court. As far as we have ascertained, th......
- Jahn v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue