Kauffman v. Johnston, 18735.
| Citation | 454 F.2d 267 |
| Decision Date | 07 January 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 18735.,18735. |
| Parties | Joseph KAUFFMAN, Jack Gittlemacker, State Correctional Institution, Dallas, Pennsylvania v. Frank C. JOHNSTON, Supt., State Correctional Institution, Dallas, Pennsylvania, Joseph Kauffman, Appellant. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit) |
Joseph Kauffman, pro se.
Herbert Monheit, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee.
Before BIGGS, ADAMS and ROSENN, Circuit Judges.
We deal now with the appeal of Kauffman at our No. 18,735, at No. 69-77 Civil in the District Court. The first paper filed by Kauffman and others is entitled "Petition for Three Judge Panel to Adjudicate Emergency Request for Temporary Injunction on Jewish Religious Dispute," pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2284. The case is not one for a Three-Judge court as the District Judge correctly found. Ex parte Poresky, 290 U. S. 30, 54 S.Ct. 3, 78 L.Ed. 152 (1933). The Judge, however, treated Kauffman's petition as a complaint and refused to grant injunctive relief for an alleged violation of Kauffman's alleged constitutional religious rights while he was a detainee in the Pennsylvania State Correctional Institution at Dallas.
The Trial Court, however, found that the case had been rendered moot, and stated: The contents of the quoted language constitute an insufficient answer to the grievances alleged in the complaint, even if the substance of the quoted language were part of the record, which it is not.1
It follows that the case is not moot for the reason asserted by the Attorney General on behalf of Superintendent Johnston but it is moot for an adequate reason. The prayer of the complaint was for the District Court "To issue an immediate temporary injunction and/or a restraining order preventing Frank C. Johnston from interfering with the ordering of kosher food . . .". The order for kosher food was directed to the celebration of Jewish holidays now long passed, particularly the then oncoming "Passover" of 1969. It follows,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kalmanovitz v. G. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc.
...violate the federal securities laws and antitrust laws or Delaware state law when these acts have already occurred. See Kauffman v. Johnston, 454 F.2d 267 (3d Cir.1972) (petition to enjoin deprivation of religious rights in connection with 1969 Passover mooted by passing of the holiday); Ty......
-
United States v. Kahane
...that provides Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish clergy must provide Muslim minister on similar contractual basis); Kauffman v. Johnston, 454 F.2d 264 (3d Cir. 1972) (prison made effort to secure the services of a Jewish rabbi for Jewish prisoners); Long v. Parker, 390 F.2d 816 (3d Cir. 1968)......
-
Central R. Co. of New Jersey, Matter of
...has already been paid to B & O and C & O. DeFunis v. Odegaard, 416 U.S. 312, 94 S.Ct. 1704, 40 L.Ed.2d 164 (1974); Kauffman v. Johnston, 454 F.2d 267 (3d Cir. 1972); Woody v. Judge, 435 F.2d 706 (3d Cir. 1970); National Lawyers' Guild, University of Texas Chapter v. Regents of University of......
-
Kauffman v. Johnston, 18734.
...filed one brief in both cases, apparently failing to grasp the fact that one action is moot and one is not. See our opinion in Kauffman v. Johnston, 454 F.2d 267 filed concurrently with this It is interesting to observe that the Assistant Attorney General asserts a unique philosophical reli......