Case ID: f2d_842/html/0194-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

J. DOE, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Linda REIVITZ and John Erickson, Defendants-Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Otis BOWEN and Kay Wilmoth, Third-Party-Defendants.
    Nos. 86-2350, 86-2561.
    United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
    March 22, 1988.
    Before WOOD and CUDAHY, Circuit Judges, and ESCHBACH, Senior Circuit Judge.
   ORDER

The court, sua sponte, amends the opinion in the above-entitled cause, issued September 28, 1987, 830 F.2d 1441 (7th Cir.1987), by adding the following language to footnote 11 at page 1448 of the opinion:

After we issued our opinion in this case, we received a letter from plaintiffs’ counsel suggesting that some of the above-cited sections apply to the Wisconsin program since that program is not entirely a general WIN program. Neither the state nor the federal government, however, filed a petition for rehearing, and this portion of our statutory analysis remains applicable to the extent the program is a general WIN program. Further, nothing in the letter casts any doubt on the remainder of our analysis or on the result.