Kimberlin, Brett C. v. Quinlan, Michael J.

D.C. Circuit

Kimberlin, Brett C. v. Quinlan, Michael J.

207 F.3d 667, 340 U.S. App. D.C. 508, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 6424, 2000 WL 303166

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit·Decided April 4, 2000·No. 98-5530·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

Circuit Judges SENTELLE and GARLAND did not participate in the matter.

A statement of Circuit Judge KAREN LeCRAFT HENDERSON dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc is attached.

PER CURIAM.

ORDER

Appellants’ petition for rehearing en banc and the response thereto have been circulated to the full court. The taking of a vote was requested. Thereafter, a majority of the judges of the court in regular, active service did not vote iñ favor of the petition. Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is

ORDERED that the petition be denied.

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

Circuit Judges SENTELLE and GARLAND did not participate in the matter.

A statement of Circuit Judge KAREN LeCRAFT HENDERSON dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc is attached.

PER CURIAM.

ORDER

Appellants’ petition for rehearing en banc and the response thereto have been circulated to the full court. The taking of a vote was requested. Thereafter, a majority of the judges of the court in regular, active service did not vote iñ favor of the petition. Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is

ORDERED that the petition be denied.

Kimberlin, Brett C. v. Quinlan, Michael J., 207 F.3d 667, 340 U.S. App. D.C. 508, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 6424, 2000 WL 303166 (D.C. Cir. 2000).

Pincite

207 F.3d 667 (Kimberlin, Brett C. v. Quinlan, Michael J.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related