Case ID: f3d_335/html/0833-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ginny V. WHITE; Jimmie D. White, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, a Delaware Corporation, Defendant-Appellant, and Orscheln Company, a Missouri Corporation, Defendant.
    No. 99-15185.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted May 1, 2000.
    Filed Dec. 3, 2002.
    Amended July 3, 2003.
    Andrew L. Frey (argued), Mayer, Brown & Platt, New York, NY. On the brief were Evan M. Tager, Miriam R. Nemetz, Mayer, Brown, Rowe, & Maw, LLP, Washington, DC, W. Chris Wicker, Woodburn & Wedge, Reno, NV, for defendants-appellants.
    Shanin Specter (argued), Kline & Specter, P.C., Philadelphia, PA, Don Nomura, Laxalt & .Nomura, LTD., Reno, NV, for the plaintiffs-appellees.
    
      Before: WOOD, KLEINFELD, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      . The Honorable Harlington Wood, Jr., Senior Judge for the Seventh Circuit, sitting by designation.
    
   ORDER

The majority opinion filed on December 3, 2002, is amended as follows.

At page 18, lines 19-21 of the slip opinion, delete the sentence ‘We need not decide whether the district court abused its discretion in allowing the opinion into evidence in this case, because we reverse on other grounds.” Also, delete footnote 26, referred to at the end of that sentence. Substitute the sentence, “Nevertheless, we cannot say that the district judge abused his discretion in allowing the opinion into evidence in this case.”

With these amendments, the petition for rehearing is denied. No further petitions for rehearing may be filed.