Case Name: Leonard BURSTEN, Appellant, v. William J. PHILLIPS, Sidney J. Adler, Bernardo M. Yorba, Donald N. Schneider, and Stephen W. Bradford, Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1965-10-06
Citations: 351 F.2d 616
Docket Number: No. 19410
Parties: Leonard BURSTEN, Appellant, v. William J. PHILLIPS, Sidney J. Adler, Bernardo M. Yorba, Donald N. Schneider, and Stephen W. Bradford, Appel-lees.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 351
Pages: 616–616

Head Matter:
Leonard BURSTEN, Appellant, v. William J. PHILLIPS, Sidney J. Adler, Bernardo M. Yorba, Donald N. Schneider, and Stephen W. Bradford, Appel-lees.
No. 19410.
United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.
Oct. 6, 1965.
James O. Warner, Los. Angeles, Cal., for appellant.
Daniel L. Stack, Launer, Chaffee & Hanna, Fullerton, Cal., for appellees.
Before BARNES, BROWNING and DUNIWAY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
DUNIWAY, Circuit Judge:
Appeal from an order denying a preliminary injunction. It appears that the matter is moot, and that the appeal, should be dismissed. Appellant asserts that the findings that the trial court made purport to dispose of the merits of the action. That is not their effect. Ordinarily, the findings made on motion for preliminary injunction, even though they relate, in whole or in part, to issues going to the merits of the case, are not determinative of those issues at trial. (See Tanner Motor Livery, Ltd. v. Avis, Inc., 9 Cir. 1963, 316 F.2d 804.) We see no reason to depart from the ordinary rule in this case. Appellant, at trial of the merits, will be entitled to have new findings made as to all material issues. There is no need to order the findings vacated.
Dismissed.