M. Philmore Howlette and William v. Daniel, on Behalf of Themselves and all Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, and Richmond Independent Taxpayers Association, Inc., Et Al., Appellants, v. City of Richmond, Virginia, William J. Leidinger, City Manager and H. Jack Lissenden, Director of Finance, Appellees., 580 F.2d 704 (4th Cir. 1978)

Federal Circuits, 4th Cir. (July 20, 1978)

Docket number: 78-1296


Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/philmore-howlette-leidinger-lissenden-36893006
Id. vLex: VLEX-36893006

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


Citations:

FeediconRSS What's this?

Cited by:

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Cir. - Libertarian Party of Virginia; Marguerite Wagner; Dallas Cooley, M.D.; Henry Thrasher; Scott Bowden; Jim Elwood; Alvin Anders, Appellants, v. Earl Davis, Chairman State Board of Elections; A. George Cook, 3Rd Vice Chairman, State Board of Elections; Susan Fitz-Hugh, Secretary State Board of Elections, Appellees., 766 F.2d 865 (4th Cir. 1985) M.D.; Henry Thrasher; Scott Bowden; Jim Elwood; Alvin Anders, Appellants, v. Earl Davis, Chairman State Board of Elections; A. George Cook, 3Rd Vice Chairman, State Board of Elections; Susan Fitz-Hugh, Secretary State Board of Elections, Appellees.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Cir. - No. 99-3473, 265 F.3d 699 (8th Cir. 2001)

Text:

David M. Shapiro, Caudle & Shapiro, Richmond, Va., for appellants.

Michael W. Smith, Richmond, Va. (Conard B. Mattox, Jr., City Atty., and Andrew J. Brent, Lee F. Davis, Jr., Leslie W. Mullins, Christian, Barton Epps, Brent & Chappell, Richmond, Va., on brief), for appellees.

Before BUTZNER, RUSSELL and WIDENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The appellants contest a judgment of the district court upholding the constitutionality of a provision of the charter of the City of Richmond requiring each signature of a qualified voter on a petition for a referendum to be verified before a notary. For reasons adequately stated in the memorandum of the district court, Howlette v. The City of Richmond, C/A No. 78-0215-R (April 14, 1978), we conclude that the ordinance is valid. Cf. American Party of Texas v. White, 415 U.S. 767, 94 S.Ct. 1296, 39 L.Ed.2d 744 (1974).

The appellants also complain of the court's rulings concerning designation of a class representative, and they question whether the plaintiffs are acting independently of the defendants. Inasmuch as the appellants were allowed to intervene, the court's designation of the plaintiffs as the representatives of the class is of little moment. The intervenors in effect also protected the class. If they had prevailed on the merits, the relief afforded them would have inured to the benefit of the class.

The judgment is affirmed. The clerk is directed to issue the mandate forthwith.

Sponsored Ads:




Activate your free trial now

Make your order

Need help? Contact us

Try vLex for FREE for 3 days

Access legal information from United States including:

  • Constitutions
  • Forms and Contracts
  • Legal Books and Journals
  • Case Law
  • News and Business
  • Regulations
  • U.S. Code

Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.

3

days of Free Access