United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Brenda Lee Working, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant

Ninth Circuit

United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Brenda Lee Working, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant

194 F.3d 1340, 99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8762, 99 Daily Journal DAR 11207, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 28405

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedNovember 1, 1999

Docket98-31021

StatusPublished

This text of 194 F.3d 1340 (United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Brenda Lee Working, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Brenda Lee Working, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant, 194 F.3d 1340, 99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8762, 99 Daily Journal DAR 11207, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 28405 (9th Cir. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

194 F.3d 1340 (9th Cir. 1999)

United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee,
v.
Brenda Lee Working, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant.

Nos. 98-31021, 98-30122.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

November 1, 1999

ORDER

Hug, Chief Judge.

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused regular active judges of this court, it is ordered that this case be reheard by the en banc court pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion, United States v. Working, 175 F.3d 1150 (9th Cir. 1999), is withdrawn.

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