Richard Smith, and v. Charles F. Denny, And

Good Law
417 F.2d 614·1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 10367
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 20, 196922861California286 words

Opinion

Opinion

The motion to dismiss is granted. The plaintiffs (appellants) now have no interest whatever in the litigation. The children for whom the suit was brought have graduated from high school, thus depriving them and their parents of any continuing interest in the litigation.

Appellants resist the motion with an impressive array of authorities. We think this is one case still covered by Doremus v. Board of Education, 342 U.S. 429 , 72 S.Ct. 394 , 96 L.Ed. 475 .

Subsequent authorities indicate that where there is a strong chance that the same complained of conduct will reoccur and the same plaintiffs be offended by it, the cause is not necessarily moot.

Moore v. Ogilvie, 394 U.S. 814 , 89 S.Ct. 1493 , 23 L.Ed.2d 1 is the best authority of appellant, but we distinguish it this way:

In Moore the appellants, who were candidates for the post of presidential elector, challenged the exclusion of their names from the ballot. The Supreme Court decided that although the election was over, the case was not moot because the appellants would again be subjected to the state election law at issue if they chose to again seek election as presidential electors. The appellants here do not show how…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.