United States v. Meyer

District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals

Rehearing En Banc Granted and Opinion Vacated April 30, 1987.

Decided Judgment and Panel Opinion Reinstated July 31, 1987.

Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied July 31, 1987.

District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1987-07-31

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently September 1999

22 federal appellate ·

Applies 25 U.S.C. § 345 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2680 · 42 U.S.C. § 1395F (§ 1814 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1987-07-31

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Before WALD, Chief Judge; ROBINSON, MIKVA, EDWARDS, RUTH BADER GINSBURG, BORK, STARR, SILBERMAN, BUCKLEY, WILLIAMS and D.H. GINSBURG, Circuit Judges.

¶2ORDER

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4Appellant’s suggestion for rehearing en banc has been circulated to the full court. The taking of a vote thereon was requested. Thereafter, a majority of the judges of the court in regular active service voted in favor of the suggestion. Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is

¶5ORDERED, by the court en banc, that appellant’s suggestion for rehearing en banc is granted and it is

¶6FURTHER ORDERED, by the court en banc, that the opinion and judgment of February 13, 1987 be, and the same hereby are, vacated.

¶7A future order will govern further proceedings herein.