Mckinney v. Pate

Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided June 17, 1993.

Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1993-06-17

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently May 1994

3 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on McKinney v. Pate

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1993-06-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Thomas J. Pilacek, Longwood, FL, for plaintiff-appellant.

¶2Lewis E. Shelley, Tallahassee, FL, for defendants-appellees.

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

¶4Before TJOFLAT, Chief Judge, FAY, KRAVTICH, HATCHETT, ANDERSON, EDMONDSON, COX, BIRCH, DUBINA, BLACK and CARNES, Circuit Judges.

¶5 *773BY THE COURT:

¶6A member of this court in active service having requested a poll on the suggestion for rehearing en banc and a majority of the judges in this court in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en banc,

¶7IT IS ORDERED that the above cause shall be reheard by this court en banc. The previous panel’s opinion is hereby VACATED.