Case Name: Robert O. CLOUSER, et al., Individually and as Members of the District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment, Appellants, v. HOT SHOPPES, INC., a corporation, Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1965-05-12
Citations: 346 F.2d 834
Docket Number: No. 18920
Parties: Robert O. CLOUSER, et al., Individually and as Members of the District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment, Appellants, v. HOT SHOPPES, INC., a corporation, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 346
Pages: 834–835

Head Matter:
Robert O. CLOUSER, et al., Individually and as Members of the District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment, Appellants, v. HOT SHOPPES, INC., a corporation, Appellee.
No. 18920.
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.
Argued March 29, 1965.
Decided May 12, 1965.
Mr. David P. Sutton, Asst. Corp. Counsel for the District of Columbia, with whom Messrs. Chester H. Gray, Corp. Counsel, Milton D. Korman, Principal Asst. Corp. Counsel, and Hubert B. Pair, Asst. Corp. Counsel, were on the brief, for appellants.
Mr. John R. Hess, Asst. Corp. Counsel, also entered an appearance for appellants.
Mr. Frank H. Strickler, Washington, D. C., with whom Messrs. John J. Carmody, Jr., and Clifford Lawrence Wiser, Bethesda, Md., were on the brief, for appellee.
Before Wilbur K. Miller, Senior Circuit Judge, and Fahy and Danaher, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Judgment
PER CURIAM.
This case came on to be heard on the record on appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and was argued by counsel; and the trial judge having determined that the administrative record as stipulated is insufficient for the achievement of finality and having accordingly directed a remand for further proceedings before the Board of Zoning Adjustment at which additional testimony and argument may be adduced, as from Judge Youngdahl's opinion will more fully appear,
Now, upon consideration of the foregoing and of the record before this court,
It is Ordered and Adjudged by this court that the judgment of the District Court, 231 F.2d 825, substantially for the reasons set forth in its opinion, is affirmed.
It is further Ordered by the court that appellee herein recover from appellant its taxable costs on this appeal, and have execution therefor.