Case Name: Phyllis Wright HARRIS, on her own behalf and on behalf of her three children; Beverly Harris Butler, formerly Beverly Harris; Samuel Harris, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 241; Board of Trustees of District No. 241; Trent Woods, Chairperson of Board; Al Arnzen, Superintendent, Defendants-Appellees, v. CITIZENS PRESERVING AMERICA'S HERITAGE, INC., an Idaho Corporation, et al., Defendants-Intervenors-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1995-08-11
Citations: 62 F.3d 1233
Docket Number: No. 93-35839
Parties: Phyllis Wright HARRIS, on her own behalf and on behalf of her three children; Beverly Harris Butler, formerly Beverly Harris; Samuel Harris, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 241; Board of Trustees of District No. 241; Trent Woods, Chairperson of Board; Al Arnzen, Superintendent, Defendants-Appellees, v. CITIZENS PRESERVING AMERICA’S HERITAGE, INC., an Idaho Corporation, et al., Defendants-Intervenors-Appellees.
Judges: Before: WRIGHT, WIGGINS, and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 62
Pages: 1233–1233

Head Matter:
Phyllis Wright HARRIS, on her own behalf and on behalf of her three children; Beverly Harris Butler, formerly Beverly Harris; Samuel Harris, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 241; Board of Trustees of District No. 241; Trent Woods, Chairperson of Board; Al Arnzen, Superintendent, Defendants-Appellees, v. CITIZENS PRESERVING AMERICA’S HERITAGE, INC., an Idaho Corporation, et al., Defendants-Intervenors-Appellees.
No. 93-35839.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Aug. 11, 1995.
Before: WRIGHT, WIGGINS, and THOMPSON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ORDER
Pursuant to the orders of the United States Supreme Court, Joint Sch. Dist. 241 v. Harris, - U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 2604, 132 L.Ed.2d 849 (1995), and Citizens Preserving America's Heritage, Inc. v. Harris, — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 2604, 132 L.Ed.2d 849 (1995), the opinion of this court, reported at 41 F.3d 447 (9th Cir.1994), is vacated, and the appeal is dismissed as moot. See United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36, 71 S.Ct. 104, 95 L.Ed. 36 (1950).
The case is remanded to the district court with instructions to vacate its judgment and dismiss the complaint as moot. See Great Western Sugar Co. v. Nelson, 442 U.S. 92, 93-94, 99 S.Ct. 2149, 2149-50, 60 L.Ed.2d 735 (1979).
Appellants' motion for fees is denied.