Luna v. Mullenix

Fifth Circuit

Luna v. Mullenix

777 F.3d 221, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 24811, 2014 WL 7269672

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedDecember 19, 2014

DocketNo. 13-10899

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 777 F.3d 221 (Luna v. Mullenix) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Luna v. Mullenix, 777 F.3d 221, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 24811, 2014 WL 7269672 (5th Cir. 2014).

Pincite

Opinions

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

PER CURIAM:

Treating the petition for rehearing en banc as a petition for panel rehearing, the petition for panel rehearing is DENIED. The court having been polled at the request of one of its members, and a majority of the judges who are in regular active service and not disqualified not having voted in favor (Fed. R.App. P. 35 and 5th Cir. R. 35), the petition for rehearing en banc is DENIED.

In the en banc poll, 6 judges voted in favor of rehearing (Judges Jolly, Davis, Jones, Smith, Clement, and Owen), and 9 judges voted against rehearing (Chief Judge Stewart and Judges Dennis, Prado, Elrod, Southwick, Haynes, Graves, Higginson, and Costa).

ENTERED FOR THE COURT:

/s/ James E. Graves, Jr.

JAMES E. GRAVES, JR.

United States Circuit Judge

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