U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1974

National Lawyers Guild, University of Texas Chapter, Plainitiffs-Appellants v. Board of Regents of the University of Texas System

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided April 4, 1974 · Brown, Gewin, Goldberg, Per Curiam

490 F.2d 97 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

James M. Simons, Cameron M. Cunningham, John Howard, Austin, Tex., for plaintiffs-appellants., John L. Hill, Atty. Gen. of Texas, Roland Allen, W. 0. Shultz II, Asst. Attys. Gen., Austin, Tex., for defendants-appel-lees.

Cases that cite this one

15 later published cases cite this decision. The 12 that cite it most often are listed here.

Brett Merkey and Young Socialist Alliance v. The Board of Regents of the State of Florida, Etc. (5th Cir. 1974)
Robert Pugh and Nathaniel Henderson v. James Rainwater (5th Cir. 1978)
Albert Johnson v. State of Mississippi (5th Cir. 1974)
Eartha L. St. Ann, Etc. v. Vincent Palisi, Etc. (5th Cir. 1974)
Curtis v. Taylor (5th Cir. 1980)
Jack McRae v. Marvin Hogan, Warden, and United States of America (5th Cir. 1978)
J. Henry Schroeder Banking Corp. v. Blumenthal (5th Cir. 1977)
Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. United States (5th Cir. 1976)
In the Matter of the Central Railroad Company of New Jersey, Debtor. Appeal of United States of America (3d Cir. 1975)
National Lawyers Guild, University of Texas Chapter v. Board of Regents of University of Texas System (5th Cir. 1974)
Peter S. Desimone v. Velma Linford, Etc. (5th Cir. 1974)
Bennie Stone Gooden, Jr., Etc., Plaintiffs-Appellees-Cross v. Mississippi State University, Etc., Defendants-Appellants-Crossappellees (5th Cir. 1974)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This suit was filed in the District Court to obtain a mandatory injunction requiring the University officials to permit a large meeting of approximately one thousand persons of the National Lawyers Guild, a non-campus group, to be held at the student union February 16-19, 1973. Presumably, it was also to test the constitutional validity of certain Board of Regents’ rules requiring co-sponsorship by an Assistant Dean of the appropriate college (here, the College of Law) for a non-campus group. No such co-sponsorship was sought or denied.

The time for the meeting has long since gone by and there is no indication that there now is, or will be, a real case or controversy as to which these plaintiffs have adequate standing to challenge the co-sponsorship requirement or the need for injunctive relief. The case as posed is moot. The judgment of the District Court is therefore vacated and the case remanded to dismiss as moot so the case will not spawn any precedential consequences. United States v. Mun-singwear, Inc., 1950, 340 U.S. 36, 71 S. Ct. 104, 95 L.Ed. 36; St. Pierre v. United States, 1943, 319 U.S. 41, 63 S.Ct. 910, 87 L.Ed. 1199; Troy State University v. Dickey, 5 Cir., 1968, 402 F.2d 515, 516-517; New Left Educ. Project v. Board of Regents, 5 Cir., 1973, 472 F.2d 218, 221; Lebus, Regional Director v. Seafarers’ Int’l Union, 5 Cir., 1968, 398 F.2d 281, 283; United States v. West Gulf Maritime Ass’n., 5 Cir., 1972, 460 F.2d 1231. And see especially our very recent decision United States Servicemen’s Fund v. Killeen Independent School District, 5 Cir., 1974, 693 F.2d 489.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.