Court Opinion

ID: 9469343
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 02:38:05.847007+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:41:20.529695
License: Public Domain

ORDER
The appellee’s petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing en banc has been considered by the court.
The panel considered the petition for rehearing and decided, Judge Russell dissenting, that it should be and it is denied.
On a poll of the court on the suggestion for rehearing en banc, the court was evenly divided. Because a majority of the judges in regular active service did not vote in favor of rehearing en banc, that suggestion in motion is denied. From this denial, Judge Russell, Judge Widener, Judge Hall, Judge Ervin and Judge Chapman dissent, and Judge Widener has filed a dissenting opinion in which Judge Russell joins.
Entered at the direction of Judge Phillips.