Luna v. Mullenix

777 F.3d 221, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 24811, 2014 WL 7269672
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided December 19, 2014·No. No. 13-10899·Published·Cited by 9 cases

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

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

777 F.3d 221 (Luna v. Mullenix) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Randy Cole v. Michael Hunter
Fifth Circuit, 2019
Woodcock v. City of Bowling Green
165 F. Supp. 3d 563 (W.D. Kentucky, 2016)
Mullenix v. Luna
577 U.S. 7 (Supreme Court, 2015)
Roger Trent v. Steven Wade
801 F.3d 494 (Fifth Circuit, 2015)