Smiddy v. Varney
811 F.2d 504
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided February 25, 1987·No. Nos. 83-6507, 85-5687, 85-6007·Published·Cited by 3 cases
Opinion
ORDER
The petition for rehearing is granted in part.
The following language, reported at 803 F.2d 1473, first column, first full paragraph, eighth sentence, is deleted:
The city is entitled to recover its costs and attorneys’ fees in this court on its successful appeals.
The full court was advised of the suggestion for rehearing en banc. No active judge requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. (Fed.R.App.P. 35.)
In all other respects the petition for rehearing with suggestion for rehearing en banc is denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Smiddy v. Varney, 811 F.2d 504 (9th Cir. 1987).
811 F.2d 504 (Smiddy v. Varney) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Elbert B. POPPELL, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CITY OF SAN DIEGO; Sharren Carr; Chris Larson; Donald Albright, Defendants-Appellants
149 F.3d 951 (Ninth Circuit, 1998)
GENERAL DYNAMICS CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellant
139 F.3d 1280 (Ninth Circuit, 1998)
Rhodes v. Smithers
939 F. Supp. 1256 (S.D. West Virginia, 1995)