Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Calvin Rhodes v. Guiberson Oil Tools, A/K/A F.I.E., A/K/A Div. Dresser Ind. Inc., Cross-Appellee

Calvin Rhodes v. Guiberson Oil Tools, A/K/A F.I.E., A/K/A Div. Dresser Ind. Inc., Cross-Appellee, 49 F.3d 127 (5th Cir. 1995)

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1995-03-16
Topic
estate-planning

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, KING, GARWOOD, JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, JONES, SMITH, DUHÉ, WIENER, BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, STEWART and PARKER, Circuit Judges. BY THE COURT: A member of the Court in active service having requested a poll on the suggestion for *128 rehearing en banc and a majority of the judges in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en banc, IT IS ORDERED that this cause shall be reheard by the Court en banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. The Clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Calvin Rhodes v. Guiberson Oil Tools, A/K/A F.I.E., A/K/A Div. Dresser Ind. Inc., Cross-Appellee. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
7 opinions
RHODES v. GUIBERSON OIL TOOLS,49 F.3d 127(5th Cir. 1995)
CALVIN RHODES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, CROSS-APPELLANT, v. GUIBERSON OIL TOOLS,
A/K/A F.I.E., A/K/A DIV. DRESSER IND. INC., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT,
CROSS-APPELLEE.
No. 92-3770.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
March 16, 1995.
Thomas J. Lutkewitte, J. Paul Demarest, Favret, Demarest, Russo Lutkewitte, New Orleans, LA, Felix J. Springer, Day, Berry Howard, Hartford, CT, for appellant.

Joseph L. Waitz, Waitz Downer, Houma, LA, for appellee.

Dori K. Bernstein, EEOC, Office of Gen. Counsel, Washington, DC, for amicus curiae.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana; Alma Chasez, Judge.

[1] ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

[2] (Opinion November 23, 1994, 5 Cir., 1994,39 F.3d 537)
Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, KING, GARWOOD, JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, JONES, SMITH, DUHE, WIENER, BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, STEWART and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
BY THE COURT:
[3] A member of the Court in active service having requested a poll on the suggestion forPage 128rehearing en banc and a majority of the judges in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en banc,

[4] IT IS ORDERED that this cause shall be reheard by the Court en banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. The Clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.