Case Name: MICHIGAN STATE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, A Non-Profit Michigan Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Richard H. AUSTIN, Michigan Secretary of State, and Frank J. Kelley, Michigan Attorney General, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1988-12-14
Citations: 865 F.2d 716
Docket Number: No. 86-1867
Parties: MICHIGAN STATE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, A Non-Profit Michigan Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Richard H. AUSTIN, Michigan Secretary of State, and Frank J. Kelley, Michigan Attorney General, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before ENGEL, Chief Judge, RYAN, Circuit Judge, and PECK, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 865
Pages: 716–718

Head Matter:
MICHIGAN STATE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, A Non-Profit Michigan Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Richard H. AUSTIN, Michigan Secretary of State, and Frank J. Kelley, Michigan Attorney General, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 86-1867.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
Dec. 14, 1988.
Richard D. McLellan, William J. Perrone, Dykema, Gossett, Spencer, Goodnow & Trigg, Lansing, Mich., Joel M. Boyden, Dykema, Gossett, Spencer, Goodnow & Trigg, Grand Rapids, Mich., for plaintiff-appellant.
Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Richard P. Gartner, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lansing, Mich., for defendants-appellees.
Michael Corcoran, Lansing, Mich., for Michigan Citizens Lobby.
Theodore Sachs, Mark Brewer, Sachs, Nunn, Kates Kadushin, O’Hare, Helveston & Waldman, P.C., Detroit, Mich., for Mich. Democratic Party.
Before ENGEL, Chief Judge, RYAN, Circuit Judge, and PECK, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
ORDER
The Court having received a petition for rehearing en banc, and the petition having been circulated not only to the original panel members but also to all other active judges of this Court, and less than a majority of the judges having favored the suggestion, the petition for rehearing has been referred to the original hearing panel.
The panel has further reviewed the petition for rehearing and concludes that the issues raised in the petition were fully considered upon the original submission and decision of the case. Accordingly, the petition is denied.