Landry v. Hoepfner

Fifth Circuit

Landry v. Hoepfner

822 F.2d 510

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided July 9, 1987·No. No. 85-3784·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND ON SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

(Opinion June 3, 1987, 5 Cir., 1987, 818 F.2d 1169)

Before CLARK, Chief Judge, GEE, RUBIN, REAVLEY, POLITZ, RANDALL, JOHNSON, WILLIAMS, GARWOOD, JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, HILL, and JONES, Circuit Judges.

BY THE COURT:

A member of the Court in active service having requested a poll on the suggestion for rehearing en banc and a majority of the judges in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en banc,

IT IS ORDERED that this cause shall be reheard by the Court en banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. [511] The Clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.

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

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND ON SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

(Opinion June 3, 1987, 5 Cir., 1987, 818 F.2d 1169)

Before CLARK, Chief Judge, GEE, RUBIN, REAVLEY, POLITZ, RANDALL, JOHNSON, WILLIAMS, GARWOOD, JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, HILL, and JONES, Circuit Judges.

BY THE COURT:

A member of the Court in active service having requested a poll on the suggestion for rehearing en banc and a majority of the judges in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en banc,

IT IS ORDERED that this cause shall be reheard by the Court en banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. [511] The Clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.

Landry v. Hoepfner, 822 F.2d 510 (5th Cir. 1987).

Pincite

822 F.2d 510 (Landry v. Hoepfner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related