Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

46 F.3d 5

Docket Nos. 93-2527, 93-2585.

Podberesky v. Kirwan

Full caption · 2 consolidated cases

  • Daniel J. PODBERESKYv.William E. KIRWAN, President of the University of Maryland at College Park; University of Maryland at College Park (UMCP); Monica Green; Maudlyn George, on her own behalf and on behalf of her daughter Allison George; Eileen Heath; Richard A. Dalgetty; Gerard W. Henry; Maisha Herren; Aletha S. McRae, on her own behalf and on behalf of her daughter Daletha McRae; Charles L. Smith, III, on his own behalf and on behalf of his son Charles Smith, IV, Defendants-Appellees, Equal Opportunity Foundation;
  • PODBERESKYv.William E. KIRWAN, President of the University of Maryland at College Park; University of Maryland at College Park (UMCP); Monica Green; Maudlyn George, on her own behalf and on behalf of her daughter Allison George; Eileen Heath; Richard A. Dalgetty; Gerard W. Henry; Maisha Herren; Aletha S. McRae, on her own behalf and on behalf of her daughter Daletha McRae; Charles L. Smith, III, on his own behalf and on behalf of his son Charles Smith, IV, Defendants-Appellees, Equal Opportunity Foundation;

Third Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1994-12-30

Relies on Staples v. United States · Independent Federation of Flight Attendants v. Zipes · Russell v. Texas

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1994-12-30

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently August 2014

2 federal appellate · 3 district ·

40199420002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

ORDER

¶1

There having been two petitions for rehearing filed in this case, 38 F.3d 147, one by the defendants, Kirwan, et al., the other by the defendant-intervenors, Monica Green, et al., upon a request for a poll of the court on both of the petitions for rehearing en banc, there voted in favor of rehearing en banc Judges Ervin, Murnaghan and Michael, and there voted to deny rehearing en banc Judges Russell, Widener, Hall, Wilkinson, Wilkins, Niemeyer, Hamilton and Williams.

¶2

It is accordingly ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the petitions for rehearing en banc shall be, and they hereby are, denied.

¶3

The panel has considered the petitions for rehearing and is of opinion they are without merit.

¶4

It is accordingly ADJUDGED and ORDERED that the petitions for rehearing shall be, and they hereby are, denied.

¶5

On account of a possible ambiguity, however, in the footnote on page 162 of the opinion, that footnote shall be, and it hereby is, re-written to read as follows:

With the concurrences of Judge Wilkins and Judge Hamilton.

/s/ H.E. Widener, Jr.

H.E. WIDENER, JR.

For the Court*

* Podberesky has not asked for relief against the intervenors who have been awarded Banneker scholarships prior to this decision, therefore, none will be awarded against them except taxable costs and attorneys fees. Podberesky, also, has not asked for relief against any other student who has been awarded a Banneker scholarship prior to this decision; therefore, this decision has no effect on such students. We note that attorneys' fees are not awarded as a matter of course against unsuccessful intervenors, see Independent Federation of Flight Attendants v. Zipes, 491 U.S. 754 [109 S.Ct. 2732, 105 L.Ed.2d 639] (1989), and we express no opinion as to whether or not the district court should make such an award on remand.

* Judges Luttig and Motz did not participate in this decision.

/46/f3d/5 · .json · Public domain