March 23, 1994 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
No. 93-1401
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs, Appellees,
v.
NARRAGANSETT INDIAN TRIBE, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellants.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
[Hon. Raymond J. Pettine, Senior U.S. District Judge]
Before
Selya, Circuit Judge,
Aldrich and Coffin, Senior Circuit Judges.
Charles A. Hobbs, with whom Arlene Violet, Matthew S. Jaffe,
and Hobbs, Straus, Dean & Wilder were on brief, for appellants.
W. Mark Russo, with whom Jeffrey B. Pine, Attorney General,
Alan M. Shoer, Special Assistant Attorney General, Elizabeth
Murdock Myers, Suzanne Worrell, and Adler, Pollock & Sheehan were
on brief, for state appellees.
Bruce N. Goodsell on brief for municipal appellees.
Scott Harshbarger, Attorney General (Mass.), Douglas H.
Wilkins, Assistant Attorney General (Mass.), Michael J.
Carpenter, Attorney General (Me.), and Frankie Sue Del Papa,
Attorney General (Nev.) on brief for States of Massachusetts,
Maine, and Nevada, amici curiae.
Per Curiam. This opinion ends a forgotten procedural
Per Curiam.
skirmish in an enduring legal war. Following the district
court's decision and order of judgment, see State of Rhode Island
v. Narragansett Tribe of Indians, 816 F. Supp. 796 (D.R.I. 1993),
the plaintiffs prosecuted an appeal (docketed in this court as
No. 93-1400). The defendants subsequently filed this cross-
appeal, complaining of (1) a stay entered below on March 8, 1993,
and (2) the district court's ensuing denial of appellants' motion
to withdraw or modify the stay. We consolidated the two appeals.
In the proceedings that followed, appellants herein
mentioned the stay, but, beyond this mere allusion, never
breathed a whisper of the cross-appeal either in the briefs or at
oral argument. That ends the matter: it is well settled that
issues advocated in a perfunctory manner on appeal, unaccompanied
by developed argumentation, are deemed to be abandoned. See
United States v. Slade, 980 F.2d 27, 30 (1st Cir. 1992); United
States v. St. Cyr, 977 F.2d 698, 701 (1st Cir. 1992); Ryan v.
Royal Ins. Co., 916 F.2d 731, 734 (1st Cir. 1990); United States
v. Zannino, 895 F.2d 1, 17 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 494 U.S.
1082 (1990).
We need not linger. Here, we are faced not with the
skeleton of an argument, but with the ghost of one. And in any
event, our opinion in respect to plaintiffs' original appeal,
issued this day, likely renders the instant appeal moot.
For these reasons, we exorcise the phantom cross-appeal
from our midst.
Appeal dismissed. No costs.
Appeal dismissed. No costs.
2