Western Pac. R. Corp. v. Western Pac. R. Co.

Good Law
206 F.2d 495·44 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 291·1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 4249
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 20, 195312506_1California2,646 words

Opinion

Opinion

Healy, J.

In its decision of April 6, 1953, the Supreme Court vacated our order of January 30, 1952, 197 F.2d 994, 1012 , denying the petitions of appellants and intervenors for a rehearing and rehearing in banc, and also set aside the later order of the full court, 197 F.2d 994, 1013, 1016 , denying leave to Western Pacific Corporation to file a motion to reinstate its petition. On June 12, 1953, the court in banc referred the matter back to this division for consideration and action in conformity with our amended Rule 23. 205 F.2d 374 . Accordingly, the original petitions for rehearing and rehearing in banc are again before us for disposition, this time in light of the Supreme Court’s observations on the subject.

We turn first to petitioners’ suggestion that the case be reheard by the full court. In the past in cases decided by a division rehearings in banc have been ordered in but four instances. It has been the policy of the court to avoid the duplication of effort and the frustrations, delays and expense to litigants necessarily incident to such anomalous procedure except in situations of a very limited class, namely those in which intra-circuit conflicts appear to have developed, or…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.