U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1987

Landry v. Hoepfner

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided July 9, 1987 · Clark, Davis, Garwood, Gee, Higginbotham, Hill, Johnson, Jolly, Jones, Politz, Randall, Reavley, Rubin, Williams

822 F.2d 510 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mark McTernan, McTernan, Parr & Rumage, New Orleans, La., for petitioner-appellant., Dorothy A. Pendergast, Asst. Dist. Atty., Research & Appeals, Gretna, La., for respondents-appellees., Rene I. Salomon, Asst. Atty. Gen., Baton Rouge, La., for amicus-Da’s., E. Pete Adams, Executive Director, La. Dist. Attys. Assoc., Inc., Baton Rouge, La., for amicus-Exec. Dir. La. Da’s Assoc.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Philip Landry v. Judge J. Robert Hoepfner and William Guste, Jr., Attorney General, State of Louisiana (5th Cir. 1987)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND ON SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

(Opinion June 3, 1987, 5 Cir., 1987, 818 F.2d 1169)

Before CLARK, Chief Judge, GEE, RUBIN, REAVLEY, POLITZ, RANDALL, JOHNSON, WILLIAMS, GARWOOD, JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, HILL, and JONES, Circuit Judges.

BY THE COURT:

A member of the Court in active service having requested a poll on the suggestion for 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. *511The Clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.