From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wren v. Smith

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
May 6, 1969
410 F.2d 390 (5th Cir. 1969)

Opinion

No. 27045.

May 6, 1969.

Charles E. Wren, Jr., pro se.

Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen. of Georgia, Mathew Robins, Asst. Atty. Gen., Dept. of Law, Atlanta, Ga., for appellee.

Before GEWIN, GOLDBERG and DYER, Circuit Judges.


In this pro se case appellants have failed to file a brief within the time fixed by Rule 31, F.R.A.P., and it is therefore appropriate to dispose of this case summarily pursuant to Rule 9(c)(2) of this Court. Stout v. Broom, 5 Cir. 1969, 406 F.2d 758.

The appellants are prisoners in the Georgia State Penitentiary at Reidsville who petitioned the district court for an injunction to block desegregation of prison facilities. The integration had been ordered by a three-judge district court. See Wilson et al. v. Kelley, N.D.Ga. 1968, 294 F. Supp. 1005.

Injunctive relief was denied below on grounds that Wilson was a proper class action under Rule 23(b)(1), F.R. Civ.P., and appellants, being within the class designated as plaintiffs in that action, are bound by that decision. Rule 23(c)(3), F.R.Civ.P. The district court was correct in its interpretation of the rule. The judgment below is affirmed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Wren v. Smith

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
May 6, 1969
410 F.2d 390 (5th Cir. 1969)
Case details for

Wren v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:Charles R. WREN, Jr., et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. S. Lamont SMITH…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: May 6, 1969

Citations

410 F.2d 390 (5th Cir. 1969)

Citing Cases

Green v. McKaskle

Several paraplegic inmates testified before the court regarding their conditions of confinement. Individual…

Gillespie v. Crawford

The Green panel said: Individual members of the class may, of course, seek to intervene in the class action…