United States v. Manchester Farming Partnership

Ninth Circuit

United States v. Manchester Farming Partnership

326 F.3d 1028

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedApril 17, 2003

DocketNos. 01-30414, 01-30415, 01-20416

StatusPublished

This text of 326 F.3d 1028 (United States v. Manchester Farming Partnership) 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 v. Manchester Farming Partnership, 326 F.3d 1028 (9th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judge:

The Opinion filed January 10, 2003, slip op. 231, and appearing at 315 F.3d 1176, is amended as follows:

1. At slip op. 240, line 4, delete “with ‘deliberate indifference’ ” and replace with “without due care”.

With this amendment, the panel has voted unanimously to deny the petition for panel rehearing and the petition for rehearing.

The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc and no active judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R.App. P. 35.

The petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED.

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