BERNARD v. NEW YORK CITY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM, 396 U.S. 9 (1969)

Syllabus

U.S. Supreme Court

BERNARD v. NEW YORK CITY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM, 396 U.S. 9 (1969) 396 U.S. 9

BERNARD v. NEW YORK CITY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, FIRST
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT No. 177, Misc.
Decided October 13, 1969

Appeal dismissed.

J. Lee Rankin and Stanley Buchsbaum for New York City Employees' Retirement System, and George N. Kanoff for Lipori, appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motions to dismiss are granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.


396 U.S. 9 (1969) 396 U.S. 9 (1969) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

SELLERS v. UNITED STATES, 396 U.S. 9 (1969) 396 U.S. 9


Opinions

U.S. Supreme Court

BERNARD v. NEW YORK CITY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM, 396 U.S. 9 (1969) 396 U.S. 9 BERNARD v. NEW YORK CITY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM ET AL.
APPEAL FROM THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, FIRST
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT No. 177, Misc.
Decided October 13, 1969

Appeal dismissed.

J. Lee Rankin and Stanley Buchsbaum for New York City Employees' Retirement System, and George N. Kanoff for Lipori, appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The motions to dismiss are granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.


396 U.S. 9 (1969) 396 U.S. 9 (1969) ">

U.S. Supreme Court

SELLERS v. UNITED STATES, 396 U.S. 9 (1969) 396 U.S. 9 SELLERS v. UNITED STATES
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 264, Misc.
Decided October 13, 1969

Certiorari granted; 406 F.2d 465, vacated and remanded to District Court.

Howard Moore, Jr., for petitioner.

Solicitor General Griswold for the United States.

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the suggestion of the Solicitor General and an examination of the entire record, the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia for further consideration in light of Alderman v. United States, 394 U.S. 165.

Page 396 U.S. 9, 10