Holmes v. Neal

Seventh Circuit

Holmes v. Neal

825 F.3d 347, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 10859

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit·Decided June 3, 2016·No. Nos. 14-3359, 04-3549·Published

Opinion

ORDER

On April 5, 2016, petitioner-appellant filed a petition for rehearing with suggestion for rehearing en bane, and on May 19, 2016, respondent-appellee filed an answer to the petition. All the judges on the original panel have voted to deny the petition, and none of the judges in regular active service has requested a vote on the petition for rehearing en banc. The petition is therefore DENIED.

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

ORDER

On April 5, 2016, petitioner-appellant filed a petition for rehearing with suggestion for rehearing en bane, and on May 19, 2016, respondent-appellee filed an answer to the petition. All the judges on the original panel have voted to deny the petition, and none of the judges in regular active service has requested a vote on the petition for rehearing en banc. The petition is therefore DENIED.

Holmes v. Neal, 825 F.3d 347, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 10859 (7th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

825 F.3d 347 (Holmes v. Neal) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.