Harold Huffman v. Union Pacific Railroad
683 F.3d 619, 2012 WL 2036857, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 11470
Opinions
The court having been polled at the request of one of the members of the court, and a majority of the judges who are in regular active service and not disqualified not having voted in favor (Fed. R.App. P. 35 and 5th Cir. R. 35), the petition for rehearing en banc is DENIED.
In the en banc poll, 3 judges voted in favor of rehearing (Dennis, Elrod, and Graves), and 12 judges voted against rehearing (Jones, King, Jolly, Davis, Garza, Stewart, Clement, Prado, Owen, South-wick, Haynes, and Higginson).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Harold Huffman v. Union Pacific Railroad, 683 F.3d 619, 2012 WL 2036857, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 11470 (5th Cir. 2012).
683 F.3d 619 (Harold Huffman v. Union Pacific Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Lane v. R.A. Sims, Jr., Inc.
241 F.3d 439 (Fifth Circuit, 2001)
Rivera v. Union Pacific Railroad
378 F.3d 502 (Fifth Circuit, 2004)
The Robert Edwards
19 U.S. 187 (Supreme Court, 1821)
Tennant v. Peoria & Pekin Union Railway Co.
321 U.S. 29 (Supreme Court, 1944)
Lavender v. Kurn
327 U.S. 645 (Supreme Court, 1946)
Rogers v. Missouri Pacific Railroad
352 U.S. 500 (Supreme Court, 1957)
Michalic v. Cleveland Tankers, Inc.
364 U.S. 325 (Supreme Court, 1960)
Gallick v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad
372 U.S. 108 (Supreme Court, 1963)
Consolidated Rail Corporation v. Gottshall
512 U.S. 532 (Supreme Court, 1994)
Irvin J. Wooden v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Company
862 F.2d 560 (Fifth Circuit, 1989)
Beverly P. Davis, Wife Of/and Willie Earl Davis v. Odeco, Inc., Murphy Exploration & Production Company, Originally Sued as Odeco, Inc.
18 F.3d 1237 (Fifth Circuit, 1994)
Johnson v. Cenac Towing, Inc.
544 F.3d 296 (Fifth Circuit, 2008)
CSX Transportation, Inc. v. McBride
180 L. Ed. 2d 637 (Supreme Court, 2011)