Kathy Stupak-Thrall v. United States of America
81 F.3d 651, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 7598, 1996 WL 185928
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit·Decided April 11, 1996·No. 94-1863·Published·Cited by 12 cases
Opinion
ORDER
A majority of the Judges of this Court in regular active service have voted for rehearing of this ease en banc. Sixth Circuit Rule 14 provides as follows:
The effect of the granting of a hearing en banc shall be to vacate the previous opinion and judgment of this court, to stay the mandate and to restore the case on the docket sheet as a pending appeal.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the previous decision and judgment of this court is vacated, the mandate is stayed and this case is restored to the docket as a pending appeal.
The Clerk will direct the parties to file supplemental briefs and will schedule this case for oral argument as soon as possible.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Kathy Stupak-Thrall v. United States of America, 81 F.3d 651, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 7598, 1996 WL 185928 (6th Cir. 1996).
81 F.3d 651 (Kathy Stupak-Thrall v. United States of America) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Herr v. United States Forest Service
212 F. Supp. 3d 720 (W.D. Michigan, 2016)
United States v. Gabrion
Sixth Circuit, 2008
Stupak-Thrall v. Glickman
Sixth Circuit, 2003
Kathy Stupak-Thrall v. Daniel Glickman
346 F.3d 579 (Sixth Circuit, 2003)
Kathy Stupak-Thrall,plaintiffs-Appellees v. Daniel Glickman,defendants, the Wilderness Society, Proposed Intervenors-Appellants
226 F.3d 467 (Sixth Circuit, 2000)
Stupak-Thrall v. Glickman
988 F. Supp. 1055 (W.D. Michigan, 1997)
Stupak-Thrall v. United States
89 F.3d 1269 (Sixth Circuit, 1996)