MacFarlane

MacFarlane v. Walter

Good Law

179 F.3d 1131·99 Daily Journal DAR 5705·1999 WL 371564·1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 11885·99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4440

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 5, 1999No. 97-35725California6,270 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Reinhardt, J.

ORDER

The panel has voted to deny Appellees’ petition for rehearing. Judge Reinhardt and Judge Graber have voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc and Judge Skopil has recommended denying the petition for rehearing en banc.

The opinion is amended as follows:

(1) At Slip Op. 4197, second paragraph, line 4:

(2) At Slip Op. 4197, second paragraph, line 6:

(3) At Slip Op. 4198, top paragraph; line 1:

(4) At Slip Op. 4198, top paragraph, line 3:

*1134 (5) At Slip Op. 4198, top paragraph, lines 9-12:

(6) At Slip Op. 4199, top paragraph, line 2:

(7) At Slip Op. 4199, top paragraph, line 16:

(8) At Slip Op. 4200, line 10:

(9) At Slip Op. 4200, lines 11-12:

(10) At Slip Op. 4201, top paragraph, line 3:

(11) At Slip Op. 4201, top paragraph, line 5:

(12) At Slip Op 4210, top paragraph, line 9:

(13) At Slip Op. 4210, top paragraph, line 12:

(14) At Slip Op. 4212, second paragraph is amended to read as follows:

(15) At Slip Op. 4213, line 3:

(16) At Slip Op. 4213, line 4:

(17) At Slip Op. 4213, line 12: ■

(18) At Slip Op. 4213, lines 25-33:

OPINION

Petitioners Donald MacFarlane (“MacFarlane”) and James Fogle (“Fogle”) appeal the district court’s grant of summary…

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.