William R. Adrain, Appellant, v. Richard Riley, Secretary, Department of Education, 28 F.3d 1295 (D.C. Cir. 1994)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit - 28 F.3d 1295 (D.C. Cir. 1994) June 30, 1994

Before: WALD, RANDOLPH and ROGERS, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.


Upon consideration of the motion for partial summary affirmance, the opposition thereto, the reply, the supplemental opposition, and the motion to govern further proceedings, it is

ORDERED that the motion for summary affirmance be granted substantially for the reasons stated by the district court in its findings of fact and conclusions of law filed May 13, 1992. The court properly applied the law, and its findings of fact are not clearly erroneous. The merits of the parties' positions are so clear as to warrant summary action. See Taxpayers Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam); Walker v. Washington, 627 F.2d 541, 545 (D.C. Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 994 (1980).

The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C. Cir. Rule 41.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.