Lois Patterson v. United States

Fourth Circuit

Lois Patterson v. United States

866 F.2d 1538, 1989 WL 11912

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 5, 1989

Docket88-3902

StatusPublished

This text of 866 F.2d 1538 (Lois Patterson v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lois Patterson v. United States, 866 F.2d 1538, 1989 WL 11912 (4th Cir. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING IN BANC

The appellee’s petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing in banc was submitted to the Court. A majority of judges having voted in a requested poll of the Court to grant rehearing in banc,

IT IS ORDERED that rehearing in banc is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case shall be calendared for argument at the April Term of Court. Within ten days of the date of this order 4 additional copies of appellants’ briefs and 2 additional copies of appellee’s brief shall be filed, and appel-lee will file 9 additional copies of the joint appendix.

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

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING IN BANC

The appellee’s petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing in banc was submitted to the Court. A majority of judges having voted in a requested poll of the Court to grant rehearing in banc,

IT IS ORDERED that rehearing in banc is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case shall be calendared for argument at the April Term of Court. Within ten days of the date of this order 4 additional copies of appellants’ briefs and 2 additional copies of appellee’s brief shall be filed, and appel-lee will file 9 additional copies of the joint appendix.

United States v. Thomas F. Santoro Catherine Marie Santoro Thomas F. Santoro, as Guardian Ad Litem for Christopher Jason Ashley Santoro Claimants-Appellants, North Carolina Civil Liberties Union Legal Foundation, Amicus Curiae, and 26.075 Acres, More or Less, Located in Swift Creek Township, Wake County, North Carolina, a Parcel of Real Property and All Improvements, Buildings, Structures, Fixtures, Furnishings, and Appurtenances Situated Thereon, Said Property Being Titled in the Name of Rosemarie D. Santoro and Any and All Proceeds From the Sale of Said Property, United States of America v. Rosemarie Santoro, Claimant-Appellant, North Carolina Civil Liberties Union Legal Foundation, Amicus Curiae, and 26.075 Acres, More or Less, Located in Swift Creek Township, Wake County, North Carolina a Parcel of Real Property and All Improvements, Buildings, Structures, Fixtures, Furnishings, and Appurtenances Situated Thereon, Said Property Being Titled in the Name of Rosemarie D. Santoro and Any and All Proceeds From the Sale of Said Property, Thomas F. Santoro Catherine Marie Santoro Thomas F. Santoro, as Guardian Ad Litem for Christopher Jason Ashley Santoro

866 F.2d 1538 (Fourth Circuit, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

866 F.2d 1538, 1989 WL 11912, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lois-patterson-v-united-states-ca4-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack