Opinions of the United 1995 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

8-3-1995 Blackwell Health Center v Knoll Precedential or Non-Precedential: Docket 94-1954

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1995 Recommended Citation "Blackwell Health Center v Knoll" (1995). 1995 Decisions. Paper 194. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1995/194

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 1995 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected].

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

No. 94-1954

ELIZABETH BLACKWELL HEALTH CENTER FOR WOMEN; GREATER PHILADELPHIA WOMEN'S MEDICAL FUND; CHOICE, on behalf of themselves and the Medicaid-eligible women of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to whom they provide financial, health care and counseling services v. CATHERINE BAKER KNOLL, Treasurer of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in her official capacity; KAREN F. SNIDER, Secretary of Public Welfare of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in her official capacity; SHERRY KNOWLTON, Deputy Secretary of the Office of Medical Assistance of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in her official capacity; ROBERT P. CASEY, Governor of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in his official capacity, and their successors Catherine Baker Knoll, Karen F. Snider, Sherry Knowlton and Robert P. Casey, Appellants

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (D.C. No. 94-cv-00169)

Argued January 13, 1995 Before: COWEN, NYGAARD and ALITO, Circuit Judges (Opinion Filed July 25, 1995) ORDER AMENDING DISSENTING OPINION

It is hereby ordered that the dissenting opinion of Judge Nygaard be amended as follows: On page 48 of the slip opinion, line 9 (typescript at 25, line 6), between the phrases "a conclusion." and "I therefore", insert the following citation: See Neely v. Club Med Management Servs., Inc., Nos. 93-2069, 93-2102, __ F.3d ____, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 19904, *26, 1995 WL 442169, *9 (3d Cir. July 26, 1995) (in banc) (mere ambiguity in Supreme Court opinion insufficient to change existing decisional law).

/s/ Richard L. Nygaard U.S. Circuit Judge

Dated: August 3, 1995