Carson Harbor Village, Ltd. v. Unocal Corporation
This text of 240 F.3d 841 (Carson Harbor Village, Ltd. v. Unocal Corporation) 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.
Opinion
240 F.3d 841 (9th Cir. 2001)
CARSON HARBOR VILLAGE, Ltd., a limited partnership dba Carson Harbor Village Mobilhome Park, Plaintiff-counter-defendant Appellant,
v.
UNOCAL CORPORATION, a DELAWARE CORP., Defendant-cross-defendant,
and
CITY OF CARSON, Defendant-cross-defendant-crossclaimant-Appellee.
Nos. 98-55056 98-55210 98-55213 98-55215 98-55422
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
February 13, 2001
ORDER
SCHROEDER, Chief Judge.
Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused regular active judges of this court1 it is ordered that this case be reheard by the en banc court pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to this court or any district court of the Ninth Circuit, except to the extent adopted by the en banc court.
Notes:
Judge Wardlaw was recused
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
240 F.3d 841, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carson-harbor-village-ltd-v-unocal-corporation-ca9-2001.