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)
20-56254•Paulette Smith, individually and as Successor in Interest to Albert Dorsey, deceased v. Edward Agdeppa, an individual
20-56254Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMar 1, 2024
FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PAULETTE SMITH, individually and
as Successor in Interest to Albert
Dorsey, deceased,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
EDWARD AGDEPPA, an individual,
Defendant-Appellant,
and
CITY OF LOS ANGELES, a
municipal entity; DOES, 1 through 10,
Defendants.
No. 20-56254
D.C. No.
2:19-cv-05370-
CAS-JC
ORDER
Filed March 1, 2024
Before: Consuelo M. Callahan, Morgan Christen, and
Daniel A. Bress, Circuit Judges.
Order
-- 1 of 2 --
2 SMITH V. AGDEPPA
ORDER
Judge Callahan and Judge Bress voted to deny the
petition for rehearing en banc. Judge Christen voted to grant
the petition for rehearing en banc. The full court was advised
of the petition for rehearing en banc. A judge requested a
vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. The matter
failed to receive a majority of the votes of the nonrecused
active judges in favor of en banc consideration. Fed. R. App.
P. 35(a). Appellee’s petition for rehearing en banc, Dkt. 65,
is DENIED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.