Fowler Packing Co. v. Lanier

Ninth Circuit

Fowler Packing Co. v. Lanier

854 F.3d 1045, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 21961, 2016 WL 7176665

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedDecember 9, 2016

DocketNo. 16-16236

StatusPublished

This text of 854 F.3d 1045 (Fowler Packing Co. v. Lanier) 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

Fowler Packing Co. v. Lanier, 854 F.3d 1045, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 21961, 2016 WL 7176665 (9th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

Plaintiffs in the case appeal a district court’s order dismissing claims that a Cali[1046]*1046fornia law violates the Bill of Attainder Clause, U.S. Const, art. I, § 10, cl. 1 (the “bill of attainder claim”), and the Equal Protection Clause, U.S. Const, amend. XIV, § 1 (the “equal protection claim”). We conclude that the district court correctly dismissed the bill of attainder claim, but erroneously dismissed the equal protection claim. We therefore AFFIRM in part and REVERSE in part, and REMAND the case to the district court for further proceedings with respect to the equal protection claim only. A written opinion giving the court’s reasoning will follow in due course.

The time for filing any petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc shall be extended and shall not begin to run until the court has filed its written opinion giving its reasoning.

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

ORDER

Plaintiffs in the case appeal a district court’s order dismissing claims that a Cali[1046]*1046fornia law violates the Bill of Attainder Clause, U.S. Const, art. I, § 10, cl. 1 (the “bill of attainder claim”), and the Equal Protection Clause, U.S. Const, amend. XIV, § 1 (the “equal protection claim”). We conclude that the district court correctly dismissed the bill of attainder claim, but erroneously dismissed the equal protection claim. We therefore AFFIRM in part and REVERSE in part, and REMAND the case to the district court for further proceedings with respect to the equal protection claim only. A written opinion giving the court’s reasoning will follow in due course.

The time for filing any petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc shall be extended and shall not begin to run until the court has filed its written opinion giving its reasoning.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

854 F.3d 1045, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 21961, 2016 WL 7176665, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fowler-packing-co-v-lanier-ca9-2016.