Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

616 F.2d 254

Docket No. 78-3615.

Aretz v. United States

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided April 15, 1980.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1980-04-15

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently June 1989

5 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Aretz v. United States · United States Barksdale v. Blackburn

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1980-04-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Edmund A. Booth, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Augusta, Ga., Neil R. Peterson, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Civ. Div., Sp. Litigation, James P. Klapps, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Civ. Div., Torts Sec., Washington, D. C., for defendant-appellant.

¶2Frank P. Brannen, Perry Brannen, Jr., Savannah, Ga., for plaintiffs-appellees.

¶3ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

¶4(Opinion Oct. 15, 1979, 5 Cir., 1979, 604 F.2d 417).

¶5Before COLEMAN, Chief Judge, BROWN, AINSWORTH, GODBOLD, CHARLES CLARK, RONEY, GEE, TJOFLAT, HILL, FAY, RUBIN, VANCE, *255KRAVITCH, FRANK M. JOHNSON, Jr., GARZA, HENDERSON, REAVLEY, POLITZ, HATCHETT, ANDERSON, RANDALL, TATE, SAM D. JOHNSON and THOMAS A. CLARK, Circuit Judges.

¶6BY THE COURT:

¶7A member of the Court in active service having requested a poll on the application for rehearing én banc and a majority of the judges in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en banc.

¶8IT IS ORDERED that the cause shall be reheard by the Court en banc on briefs without oral argument. The Clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.

/616/f2d/254 · .json · Public domain