The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
05-56452•United States v. 2008-04-22 | 05-56452 | MOLSKI V. EVERGREEN DYNASTY | precedential | opinion |
05-56452Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApr 22, 2008
FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JAREK MOLSKI; DISABILITY RIGHTS
ENFORCEMENT EDUCATION SERVICES:
HELPING YOU HELP OTHERS, a No. 05-56452
California public benefit D.C. No. corporation, CV-04-00450-ER Plaintiffs-Appellants, Central District of v. California,
EVERGREEN DYNASTY CORP., d/b/a Los Angeles
MANDARIN TOUCH RESTAURANT; ORDER
BRIAN MCINERNEY; KATHY S.
MCINERNEY, as joint tenants,
Defendants-Appellees.
Filed April 22, 2008
Before: Jerome Farris and Ronald M. Gould, Circuit Judges,
and Kevin Thomas Duffy,* District Judge.
ORDER
The order denying the Petition for Rehearing En Banc in
this case, filed on April 7, 2008, is amended as follows:
In the second paragraph, the first full sentence is deleted
and is replaced with the following text: “The full court has
been advised of Plaintiff/Appellant’s Petition for Rehearing
En Banc, and a judge of this court requested a vote on
whether this case should be reheard en banc; however, a
*The Honorable Kevin Thomas Duffy, Senior United States District
Judge for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.
4217
-- 1 of 4 --
majority of the non-recused active judges of the court did not
vote in favor of en banc consideration.”
A sentence is added at the end of the order stating: “Judges
Graber and Fisher were recused from considering the en banc
issues in this case and did not participate in the court’s deci-
sion.”
4218 MOLSKI v. EVERGREEN DYNASTY CORP.
-- 2 of 4 --
-- 3 of 4 --
PRINTED FOR
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS
BY THOMSON/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO
The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted
© 2008 Thomson/West.
-- 4 of 4 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.