Hale v. Townley

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_________________________________

Nos. 92-5208 & 93-4090

________________________________

BILLY J. HALE, Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs. CARL TOWNLEY, et al., Defendants-Appellants.

BILLY J. HALE, Plaintiff-Appellant,

vs. CARL TOWNLEY, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana ----------------------------------------------------------------

Opinion on Reconsideration

(May 13, 1994)

Before REAVLEY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and ROSENTHAL, District Judge.*

PER CURIAM:

This court has noted, sua sponte, that a footnote in the opinion issued on May 3, 1994 conflicts with an opinion issued by another panel of this court dated April 29, 1994. Footnote 1 of this court's opinion stated that the application of

*

District Judge of the Southern District of Texas, sitting by designation.

Hudson v. McMillian, --- U.S. ---, 112 S. Ct. 995, 117 L. Ed. 2d 156 (1992), to Fourth Amendment claims was undecided in the Fifth Circuit. In Harper v. Harris County, Texas, CA No. 93-2062, another panel of this court held that "[a] plaintiff is no longer required to prove significant injury to assert a section 1983 Fourth Amendment excessive force claim." This court strikes footnote 1 from its earlier opinion. This court's opinion remains otherwise unchanged.