Taylor v. Cnty. of Pima

Ninth Circuit

Taylor v. Cnty. of Pima

933 F.3d 1191

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided August 14, 2019·No. No. 17-16980·Published

Opinion

Judges Siler and Graber voted to deny the petitions for panel rehearing. Judge Schroeder voted to grant the petitions for panel rehearing. Judge Graber voted to deny the petitions for rehearing en banc, and Judge Siler so recommended. Judge Schroeder recommended granting the petitions for rehearing en banc.

The full court has been advised of the petitions for rehearing en banc. A judge of the court requested a vote on en banc rehearing. The matter failed to receive a majority of votes of non-recused active judges in favor of en banc consideration. Fed. R. App. P. 35(f).

Judge Hurwitz did not participate in the deliberations or vote in this case.

The petitions for panel rehearing and the petitions for rehearing en banc are DENIED .

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

Judges Siler and Graber voted to deny the petitions for panel rehearing. Judge Schroeder voted to grant the petitions for panel rehearing. Judge Graber voted to deny the petitions for rehearing en banc, and Judge Siler so recommended. Judge Schroeder recommended granting the petitions for rehearing en banc.

The full court has been advised of the petitions for rehearing en banc. A judge of the court requested a vote on en banc rehearing. The matter failed to receive a majority of votes of non-recused active judges in favor of en banc consideration. Fed. R. App. P. 35(f).

Judge Hurwitz did not participate in the deliberations or vote in this case.

The petitions for panel rehearing and the petitions for rehearing en banc are DENIED .

Taylor v. Cnty. of Pima, 933 F.3d 1191 (9th Cir. 2019).

Pincite

933 F.3d 1191 (Taylor v. Cnty. of Pima) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.