Court Opinion

ID: 8828775
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-26 15:55:54.635133+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:04:51.603096
License: Public Domain

ORDER
PER CURIAM.
In light of the Supreme Court decision in Weinberger v. Salfi,-U.S.-, 95 S.Ct. 2457, 45 L.Ed.2d 522 (1975), and of the entire record herein, we conclude, sua sponte, that since no substan*965tial constitutional question is presented a three-judge district court is not required to hear and determine this case under 28 U.S.C. § 2282 (1970). See Idlewild Liquor Corp. v. Epstein, 370 U.S. 713, 715, 82 S.Ct. 1294, 8 L.Ed.2d 794 (1962); Brotherhood of Locomotive Fire. & E. v. Certain Carriers, Etc., 118 U.S.App.D.C. 100, 331 F.2d 1020, cert. denied, 377 U.S. 918, 84 S.Ct. 1181, 12 L.Ed.2d 187 (1964). Accordingly, the three-judge district court heretofore convened is hereby dissolved. See Weinberger v. Salfi, supra; MTM, Inc. v. Baxley, 420 U.S. 799, 95 S.Ct. 1278, 43 L.Ed.2d 636 (1975); Gonzalez v. Automatic Employees Credit Union, 419 U.S. 90, 95 S.Ct. 289, 42 L.Ed.2d 249 (1974); Mengelkoch v. Industrial Welfare Comm’n, 393 U.S. 83, 89 S.Ct. 60, 21 L.Ed.2d 215 (1968); Wilson v. Port Lavaca, 391 U.S. 352, 88 S.Ct. 1502, 20 L.Ed.2d 636 (1968).
So ordered.