A.M. JATOI, MD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HURST-EULESS-BEDFORD HOSPITAL AUTHORITY, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees

Fifth Circuit

A.M. JATOI, MD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HURST-EULESS-BEDFORD HOSPITAL AUTHORITY, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees

819 F.2d 545, 50 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1728, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 44 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 37,362

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJune 18, 1987

Docket85-1745

StatusPublished

Cited by25 cases

This text of 819 F.2d 545 (A.M. JATOI, MD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HURST-EULESS-BEDFORD HOSPITAL AUTHORITY, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

A.M. JATOI, MD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HURST-EULESS-BEDFORD HOSPITAL AUTHORITY, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees, 819 F.2d 545, 50 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1728, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 44 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 37,362 (5th Cir. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

(Opinion January 14, 5th Cir.1987, 807 F.2d 1214)

Before CLARK, Chief Judge, REAVLEY, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

On Petition for Rehearing the panel modifies its opinion to include the test for racial discrimination in § 1981 cases announced by the Supreme Court in Saint Francis College, et al. v. Al-Khazraji, — U.S. -, -, 107 S.Ct. 2022, 2026, 95 L.Ed.2d 582 (1987). In St. Francis the Supreme Court explained that “a distinctive physiognomy is not essential to qualify for § 1981 protection.” This test modifies the statement in our original opinion that a plaintiff must allege he suffered discrimination based on his membership in a group that is ethnically and physiognomically distinct. 807 F.2d at 1218.

On remand defendant Methodist Affiliated Hospitals will have the opportunity to seek dismissal of the case against it based on the assertion it made to this Court that no evidence has connected it to Dr. Jatoi’s claims..

No member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on this Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc, (Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and Local Rule 35) the Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc is DENIED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

(Opinion January 14, 5th Cir.1987, 807 F.2d 1214)

Before CLARK, Chief Judge, REAVLEY, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

On Petition for Rehearing the panel modifies its opinion to include the test for racial discrimination in § 1981 cases announced by the Supreme Court in Saint Francis College, et al. v. Al-Khazraji, — U.S. -, -, 107 S.Ct. 2022, 2026, 95 L.Ed.2d 582 (1987). In St. Francis the Supreme Court explained that “a distinctive physiognomy is not essential to qualify for § 1981 protection.” This test modifies the statement in our original opinion that a plaintiff must allege he suffered discrimination based on his membership in a group that is ethnically and physiognomically distinct. 807 F.2d at 1218.

On remand defendant Methodist Affiliated Hospitals will have the opportunity to seek dismissal of the case against it based on the assertion it made to this Court that no evidence has connected it to Dr. Jatoi’s claims..

No member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on this Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc, (Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and Local Rule 35) the Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc is DENIED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

819 F.2d 545, 50 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1728, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 44 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 37,362, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/am-jatoi-md-plaintiff-appellant-v-hurst-euless-bedford-hospital-ca5-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack