# Camacho v. Rogers

> District Court, S.D. New York · October 19, 1961 · 199 F. Supp. 155

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9764777

## Case

- **Full name:** Application of Jose CAMACHO, Plaintiff, v. William T. ROGERS, Attorney General of the United States, Nelson Rockefeller, Governor of the State of New York, Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of the State of New York, and the Board of Elections of the City of New York, Defendants
- **Court:** District Court, S.D. New York
- **Decided:** October 19, 1961
- **Citations:** 199 F. Supp. 155; 1961 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5423
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Edelstein
- **Judges:** Lumbard, Edelstein, Metzner
- **Cited by:** 18 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9764777

## Opinion text

EDELSTEIN, District Judge
(concurring).
I concur in the dismissal of the complaint.
Plaintiff has alleged six grounds as the basis for his claim to relief. As to the first four grounds, i. e., the Treaty of Paris, the Fourteenth Amendment, the Fifteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C.A. § 1971 (a), and as to that portion of the fifth ground which refers to the Civil Rights Act of 1957, I agree that plaintiff is barred by res judicata. As to that portion of the fifth ground which refers to the Civil Rights Act of 1960 and as to the sixth ground, i. e., Article 55 of the United Nations Charter, I agree that they are not applicable for the reasons stated in the court’s opinion. I also concur in the dismissal of the complaint as against the Governor and the Attorney General of the state on the ground that they are not proper parties.
Since this disposes of the case, I see no need for a dictum on the merits of those issues which are not before the court. Accordingly, I concur in the result without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issues raised by plaintiff which are barred by res judicata.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9764777. Public record. Not legal advice.