Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

357 F.3d 895

Docket No. 02-15057.

Kong v. Scully

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Argued and Submitted April 9, 2003.

Filed Sept. 2, 2003.

Amended Feb. 6, 2004.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 2003-09-02

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 2003

1 federal appellate ·

3 counsel of record

Relies on Kong v. Scully

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2003-09-02

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Robert J. Bruno, Burnsville, MN, for the plaintiff-appellant.

¶2Lowell V. Sturgill, Jr., Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for defendants-*896appellees Thomas Scully and Tommy Thompson.

¶3Stephen M. Shapiro, Chicago, IL, for the defendant-intervenor-appellee.

¶4Before: NOONAN, McKEOWN, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

¶5ORDER

¶6Judge McKeown’s concurrence filed on September 2, 2003 is amended as follows:

¶7Insert at Slip. Op. 12829 [341 F.3d at 1147] before “In defending an exclusively-religious ...”: “In the same vein, service providers would not be limited to religious institutions.”

¶8With this amendment, the panel has voted to deny the petition for rehearing. Judges McKeown and Rawlinson have voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc and Judge Noonan recommends denying the petition for rehearing en banc.

¶9The full court has been advised of the petition for rehearing en banc, and no active judge has requested a vote whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R.App. P. 35.

¶10The petition for rehearing is DENIED and the petition for rehearing en banc is DENIED.

¶11Appellant’s motion of January 22, 2004 in which to file a reply brief is GRANTED.

/357/f3d/895 · .json · Public domain