Court Opinion

ID: 9479981
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 07:34:36.286884+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:47:24.677943
License: Public Domain

*929ON PETITION FOR REHEARING WITH SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING IN BANC
ORDER
The appellant’s petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing in banc were submitted to the Court. In a requested poll of the Court, Judges Phillips, Murna-ghan, Sprouse, and Winter voted to rehear the case in banc; and Judges Ervin, Russell, Widener, Hall, Chapman, Wilkinson, and Wilkins voted against rehearing the case in banc. As a majority of the judges voted to deny rehearing in banc, and
As the panel considered the petition for rehearing and is of the opinion that it should be denied, with Judge Murnaghan dissenting,
IT IS ADJUDGED AND ORDERED that the petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing in bane are denied.
Entered at the direction of Judge CHAPMAN, Circuit Judge.
MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judge, dissents.