Case Name: Gary CORBIN, in his capacity as a Trustee and Fiduciary of the Pattern & Model Makers Association of Warren & Vicinity Pension Fund, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Karl BLANKENBURG; John Cruz; Charles Furlotte; Robert Kuschel; Joseph Laughhunn; Robert Joe Ledbetter; David Margolis; David McEachin; Robert Stephens; Jerome Wilson; Robert Udell; Mid-Continental Claim Service and Administrators, Inc.; Gary Novara; Laurence Breskin, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1993-10-04
Citations: 999 F.2d 1043
Docket Number: No. 92-1540
Parties: Gary CORBIN, in his capacity as a Trustee and Fiduciary of the Pattern & Model Makers Association of Warren & Vicinity Pension Fund, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Karl BLANKENBURG; John Cruz; Charles Furlotte; Robert Kuschel; Joseph Laughhunn; Robert Joe Ledbetter; David Margolis; David McEachin; Robert Stephens; Jerome Wilson; Robert Udell; Mid-Continental Claim Service and Administrators, Inc.; Gary Novara; Laurence Breskin, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: MERRITT, Chief Judge; KEITH, KENNEDY, BOYCE F. MARTIN, NATHANIEL R. JONES, MILBURN, RALPH B. GUY, DAVID A. NELSON, RYAN, BOGGS, ALAN E. NORRIS, SUHRHEINRICH, SILER, and BATCHELDER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 999
Pages: 1043–1043

Head Matter:
Gary CORBIN, in his capacity as a Trustee and Fiduciary of the Pattern & Model Makers Association of Warren & Vicinity Pension Fund, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Karl BLANKENBURG; John Cruz; Charles Furlotte; Robert Kuschel; Joseph Laughhunn; Robert Joe Ledbetter; David Margolis; David McEachin; Robert Stephens; Jerome Wilson; Robert Udell; Mid-Continental Claim Service and Administrators, Inc.; Gary Novara; Laurence Breskin, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 92-1540.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
Oct. 4, 1993.
Before: MERRITT, Chief Judge; KEITH, KENNEDY, BOYCE F. MARTIN, NATHANIEL R. JONES, MILBURN, RALPH B. GUY, DAVID A. NELSON, RYAN, BOGGS, ALAN E. NORRIS, SUHRHEINRICH, SILER, and BATCHELDER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ORDER
A majority of the Judges of this Court in regular active service have voted for rehearing of this ease en banc. Sixth Circuit Rule 14 provides as follows:
The effect of the granting of a hearing en banc shall be to vacate the previous opinion and judgment of this court, to stay the mandate and to restore the case on the docket sheet as a pending appeal.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the previous decision and judgment of this court is vacated, the mandate is stayed and this case is restored to the docket as a pending appeal.
The Clerk will direct the parties to file supplemental briefs and will schedule this ease for oral argument as soon as possible.