Walker v. San Francisco Unified School District

62 F.3d 300, 95 Daily Journal DAR 10390, 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6071, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 35257
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided August 2, 1995·No. Nos. 92-15977, 92-15979, 92-15982, 92-15983 and 92-15985·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinions

ORDER

The order denying the petition for rehearing and rejecting the suggestion for re hearing en banc, filed on July 5, 1995, is ordered published, along with Judge Reinhardt’s dissent from the order rejecting the suggestion for rehearing en banc.

Before: Thomas TANG, Stephen S. TROTT, and Ferdinand F. FERNANDEZ, Cii’cuit Judges.

ORDER

The panel has voted to deny rehearing and to reject rehearing en banc.

[301] The panel voted as follows: Judges Tang and Trott vote to deny appellee’s petition for rehearing. Judge Trott votes to deny suggestion for rehearing en bane, Judge Tang recommends rejection of the suggestion for rehearing en banc. Judge Fernandez would grant rehearing en banc.

The full court was advised of the suggestion for rehearing en banc. An active judge requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. The matter failed to receive a majority of the votes of the unrecused active judges in favor of en banc consideration. Fed.R.App.P. 35. Judge Reinhardt dissents from the denial of rehearing en banc and is joined by Judge Pregerson; Judge Hawkins also joins the dissent excepting the first paragraph thereof.

The petition for rehearing is denied and the suggestion for rehearing en banc is rejected.

The dissent is ordered to be filed with this order.

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

Walker v. San Francisco Unified School District, 62 F.3d 300, 95 Daily Journal DAR 10390, 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6071, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 35257 (9th Cir. 1995).

62 F.3d 300 (Walker v. San Francisco Unified School District) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Helms v. Picard
151 F.3d 347 (Fifth Circuit, 1998)
Helms v. Picard
151 F.3d 347 (Second Circuit, 1998)
95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6071, 95 Daily Journal D.A.R. 10,390 Albert C. Walker Roberta M. Walker John C. Soso Jacklyn C. Soso Margaret Smith Alyce Crosdale Betty Sands v. San Francisco Unified School District, and United States Department of Education Lamar Alexander, in His Official Capacity as Secretary of Education, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellants. Albert C. Walker Roberta M. Walker John C. Soso Jacklyn C. Soso Margaret Smith Alyce Crosdale Betty Sands v. Board of Education of the San Francisco Unified School District, City and County of San Francisco, State of California Ramon Cortines, Superintendent of Schools, San Francisco Unified School District San Francisco Unified School District, Albert C. Walker Roberta M. Walker John C. Soso Jacklyn C. Soso Margaret Smith Alyce Crosdale Betty Sands v. San Francisco Unified School District, City and County of San Francisco, State of California, and Deborah Martin Jacob Perea Barbara Perea, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellants. Albert C. Walker Roberta M. Walker John C. Soso Jacklyn C. Soso Margaret Smith Alyce Crosdale Betty Sands v. William Honig, as California Superintendent of Public Instruction California Department of Education California State Board of Education, and San Francisco Unified School District, Albert C. Walker Roberta M. Walker John C. Soso Jacklyn C. Soso Margaret Smith Alyce Crosdale Betty Sands v. Board of Education of the San Francisco Unified School District San Francisco Unified School District, City and County of San Francisco, State of California Ramon Cortines, Superintendent of Schools, San Francisco Unified School District, United States Department of Education Deborah Martin Lamar Alexander, in His Official Capacity as Secretary of Education Jacob Perea Barbara Perea, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellees
62 F.3d 300 (Ninth Circuit, 1995)