U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1958

Walter B. Stevens v. Arthur E. Summerfield, Postmaster General

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided May 22, 1958 · No. 14099_1 · Fahy, Washington, Bastian

257 F.2d 205; 103 U.S. App. D.C. 201; 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 4473 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. James E. Curry, Washington, D. C., for appellants., Mr. John D. Lane, Asst. U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty., Lewis Carroll and William Rafferty, Asst. U. S. Attys., Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for appellees.

Cases that cite this one

3 later published cases cite this decision.

United States v. Handler (District Court, D. Maryland 1974)
Ray Allen Tollett v. United States (8th Cir. 1973)
Tollett v. United States (8th Cir. 1973)

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 is an appeal from a judgment of the District Court, dismissing plain tiff s-appellants’ complaint, which sought to enjoin the Postmaster General from barring from the mails certain envelopes carrying printed matter placed thereon by plaintiffs-appellants. Judge Keech’s memorandum, D.C.D.C.1957, 151 F.Supp. 343, states the facts, and concludes, that the materials inscribed on the envelopes rendered them within the prohibition of 18 U.S.C. § 1718 (1952), which declares nonmailable “matter otherwise mailable by law, upon the envelope * * * of which * * * is * * * printed * * * language * * * calculated by the terms * * * and obviously intended to reflect injuriously upon the character or conduct of another * * *.” On consideration, we discern no basis for disturbing the action of the District Court in dismissing the complaint for equitable relief by way of an injunction.

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.