Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Jones v. City of Lubbock

Jones v. City of Lubbock, 682 F.2d 504 (5th Cir. 1982)

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1982-08-13
Topic
general

PER CURIAM: On appeal, 640 F.2d 777 (5th Cir. 1981), we reversed and remanded for reconsideration in light of the Supreme Court’s intervening decision in City of Mobile v. Bolden, 446 U.S. 55, 100 S.Ct. 1490, 64 L.Ed.2d 47 (1980). Shortly thereafter the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Rogers v. Lodge and we recalled and have withheld our mandate. That case has now been decided, - U.S. -, 102 S.Ct. 3272, 72 L.Ed.2d 1012 (1982).

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Jones v. City of Lubbock. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
1 opinion
JONES v. CITY OF LUBBOCK,682 F.2d 504(5th Cir. 1982)
REV. ROY JONES, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, ROSE WILSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND
AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE BLACK AND MEXICAN-AMERICAN VOTERS OF LUBBOCK,
TEXAS, PLAINTIFF-INTERVENOR-APPELLANT, v. THE CITY OF LUBBOCK, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES.
No. 79-2744.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Unit A.
August 13, 1982.
William L. Garrett, Dallas, Tex., Daniel H. Benson, Lubbock, Tex., Robert P. Davidow, George Mason Univ., Arlington, Va., Albert Perez, Mark C. Hall, Lane Arthur, Lubbock, Tex., for plaintiffs-appellants.

James P. Brewster, Trial Atty., Dennis W. McGill, Travis D. Shelton, Lubbock, Tex., for defendants-appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas; Halbert O. Woodward, Chief Judge.
[1] ON REHEARING
Before GOLDBERG, POLITZ and JOHNSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
[2] On appeal,640 F.2d 777(5th Cir. 1981), we reversed and remanded for reconsideration in light of the Supreme Court's intervening decision inCity of Mobile v. Bolden,446 U.S. 55,100 S.Ct. 1490,64 L.Ed.2d 47(1980). Shortly thereafter the Supreme Court granted certiorari inRogers v. Lodgeand we recalled and have withheld our mandate. That case has now been decided, ___ U.S. ___,102 S.Ct. 3272,72 L.Ed.2d 1012(1982). Consistent therewith,sua sponte,we grant rehearing and supplement our opinion to instruct the district court, in its re-examination, to give appropriate consideration to the teachings contained inRogers v. Lodge.

[3] REVERSED and REMANDED.