Forrest Andrews & Alex H. Sands, Trs., & Frank Drinnen, Tr. v. Robert P. White, John Morrell & Harold Edwards, 221 F.2d 790 (6th Cir. 1955). · Go Syfert
Search
Forrest Andrews & Alex H. Sands, Trs., & Frank Drinnen, Tr. v. Robert P. White, John Morrell & Harold Edwards, 221 F.2d 790 (6th Cir. 1955). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
4 citation events across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Tawfiq v. Cauley (mied, 2022-12-22)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Tawfiq v. Cauley
E.D. Mich. · 2022 · confidence medium
PageID.200-01, citing Granger v. Marek, 583 F.2d 781, 782 (6th Cir. 1978); Mandel v. Nouse, 509 F.2d 1031, 1033 (6th Cir. 1975); Andrews v. White, 221 F.2d 790, 791 (6th Cir. 1955).) As discussed above, this Court finds that the Magistrate Judge’s characterization of the relief requested in Tawfiq’s petition is inaccurate because the R&R fails to address the petition’s request to prohibit Cauley from “posting a message through the use of any medium of communication, including the internet or a computer or any electronic medium, pursuant to MCL 750.411s,” and mischaracterizes the subs…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Forrest ANDREWS and Alex H. Sands, Trustees, and Frank Drinnen, Trustee, Appellants,
v.
Robert P. WHITE, John Morrell and Harold Edwards, Appellees
12338.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Apr 25, 1955.
221 F.2d 790
Forrest Andrews, Knoxville, Tenn., for appellants., Perry W. Morton, Asst. Atty. Gen., Elizabeth Dudley, Attorney, Washington, D. C., John C. Crawford, U. S. Atty., Knoxville, Tenn., for appellees.
Allen, Martin, Per Curiam, Simons.
Cited by 4 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

This case came on to be heard upon the record and briefs and oral argument of counsel;

And it appearing that the action is brought against employees of the United States Government acting as forest rang- • ers within the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, and prays for an injunction against alleged trespass upon land to -which appellants claim title;

And it appearing that the United States Government was not joined as defendant in the action;

And the record disclosing that appel-lees acted not as individuals but as employees of the United States Government;

And it appearing that the injunction prayed for would operate against and hinder the United States in the administration of public land set aside for parks and hence constitutes an application for injunction against the sovereign;

And it appearing that appellees were exercising power delegated to them by the United States, 16 U.S.C.A. § 1 and § 403h-3, and that the sovereign cannot be sued without its consent, Larson v. Domestic & Foreign Commerce Corp., 337 U.S. 682, 69 S.Ct. 1457, 93 L.Ed. 1628.

It is ordered that the judgment dismissing the action for want of jurisdiction be and it hereby is affirmed.