Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Bunnell v. Sullivan
925 F.2d 1236
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1991-02-25
- Topic
- general
ORDER Upon the vote of a majority of nonre-cused regular active judges of this court, it is ordered that this case be reheard by the en banc court pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Bunnell v. Sullivan. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 1 opinion
BUNNELL v. SULLIVAN,925 F.2d 1236(9th Cir. 1991)
MARCIA C. BUNNELL, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. LOUIS W. SULLIVAN, SECRETARY OF
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
ARTHUR RICE, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. LOUIS W. SULLIVAN, SECRETARY OF HEALTH
AND HUMAN SERVICES, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.
Nos. 88-4179, 88-4225.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
February 25, 1991.
Page 1237
Before WALLACE, Chief Judge, BROWNING, HUG, TANG, SCHROEDER, FLETCHER, FARRIS, PREGERSON, ALARCON, POOLE, D.W. NELSON, CANBY, NORRIS, REINHARDT, BEEZER, HALL, WIGGINS, BRUNETTI, KOZINSKI, NOONAN, THOMPSON, O'SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, TROTT, FERNANDEZ, and RYMER, Circuit Judges.
[1] ORDER
[2] Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused regular active judges of this court, it is ordered that this case be reheard by the en banc court pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3.Page 159