STEVEN J. HATFILL, PLAINTIFF—APPELLANT v. THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY, DEFENDANT—APPELLEE, AND NICHOLAS KRISTOF

Fourth Circuit

STEVEN J. HATFILL, PLAINTIFF—APPELLANT v. THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY, DEFENDANT—APPELLEE, AND NICHOLAS KRISTOF

427 F.3d 253, 33 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2530, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 22397, 2005 WL 2651160

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedOctober 18, 2005

Docket04-2561

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 427 F.3d 253 (STEVEN J. HATFILL, PLAINTIFF—APPELLANT v. THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY, DEFENDANT—APPELLEE, AND NICHOLAS KRISTOF) 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

STEVEN J. HATFILL, PLAINTIFF—APPELLANT v. THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY, DEFENDANT—APPELLEE, AND NICHOLAS KRISTOF, 427 F.3d 253, 33 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2530, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 22397, 2005 WL 2651160 (4th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinions

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellee filed a petition for rehearing and/or rehearing en banc. Appellant filed a response to the petition.

A member of the Court requested a poll on the petition for rehearing en banc. The poll failed to produce a majority of judges in active service in favor of rehearing en banc. Chief Judge Wilkins and Judges Widener, Luttig, Traxler, Shedd, and Duncan voted to deny the petition. Judges Wilkinson, Niemeyer, Michael, Motz, King, and Gregory voted to grant the petition. Judge Williams did not participate in this case.

The Court denies the petition.

Judge WILKINSON filed a dissenting opinion from the order denying rehearing en banc, in which Judge MICHAEL and Judge KING joined.

Entered at the direction of Judge SHEDD for the Court.

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