Bradley v. Henry

Ninth Circuit

Bradley v. Henry

518 F.3d 657, 2008 WL 540360

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 28, 2008

Docket04-15919

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 518 F.3d 657 (Bradley v. Henry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bradley v. Henry, 518 F.3d 657, 2008 WL 540360 (9th Cir. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

The separate opinion by Judge Clifton concurring in the judgment filed on December 19, 2007 is amended as follows:

At slip op., p. 16515, 510 F.3d 1093,1099, insert the following footnote at the end of *658 the first paragraph of the separate opinion:

The plurality opinion has been joined by only five of the eleven judges on this limited en banc panel. Because that constitutes less than a majority of the panel, that opinion does not announce the law of this circuit. The precedential effect of this decision does not extend beyond the conclusions expressed in this separate opinion, which concurs in the judgment on more narrow grounds. See Marks v. United States, 430 U.S. 188, 193, 97 S.Ct. 990, 51 L.Ed.2d 260 (1977).

With this amendment, the petition for rehearing is DENIED. No further petitions for rehearing will be entertained.

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