United States v. William Underwood, Paul Messino, Christopher B. Messino, Christopher Richard Messino, and Clement Messino

130 F.3d 1225, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 33281
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit·Decided November 21, 1997·No. 95-2155, 95-2925, 95-2926, 95-3052 and 95-3124·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinions

On consideration of the petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing en banc filed in the above-entitled cause by plaintiff-appellee, a vote of the active members of the Court was requested, and a majority of the active members of the Court have voted to deny a rehearing en banc. All of the judges on the original panel have voted to deny the petition for rehearing. Accordingly,

It Is Ordered that the aforesaid petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing en banc be, and the same is hereby, Denied.

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

United States v. William Underwood, Paul Messino, Christopher B. Messino, Christopher Richard Messino, and Clement Messino, 130 F.3d 1225, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 33281 (7th Cir. 1997).

130 F.3d 1225 (United States v. William Underwood, Paul Messino, Christopher B. Messino, Christopher Richard Messino, and Clement Messino) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gomez v. Kennedy
N.D. Illinois, 2019
HCP of Illinois, Inc. v. Farbman Group I, Inc.
991 F. Supp. 2d 999 (N.D. Illinois, 2013)
United States v. Gaya
647 F.3d 634 (Seventh Circuit, 2011)
United States v. Harbin, Driefus
250 F.3d 532 (Seventh Circuit, 2001)
United States v. Messino
56 F. Supp. 2d 989 (N.D. Illinois, 1999)
United States v. Pritchett
48 M.J. 609 (Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, 1998)