The Hertz Corporation v. Donald Cox and Sarah C. Crowe

Fifth Circuit

The Hertz Corporation v. Donald Cox and Sarah C. Crowe

436 F.2d 1376

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in The Hertz Corporation v. Donald Cox and Sarah C. Crowe. Read the opinion of the Court — 430 F.2d 1365 →

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided February 2, 1971·No. 26251·Published

Opinion

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

PER CURIAM:

The Petition for Rehearing is denied and no member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc, (Rule 35 Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 12) the Petition for Rehearing En Banc is denied, 5 Cir., 430 F.2d 1365.

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

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

PER CURIAM:

The Petition for Rehearing is denied and no member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc, (Rule 35 Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 12) the Petition for Rehearing En Banc is denied, 5 Cir., 430 F.2d 1365.

The Hertz Corporation v. Donald Cox and Sarah C. Crowe, 436 F.2d 1376 (5th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

436 F.2d 1376 (The Hertz Corporation v. Donald Cox and Sarah C. Crowe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related