Court Opinion

ID: 9491366
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 14:11:58.650494+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:54:41.425229
License: Public Domain

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC
Oct. 2, 1998
PER CURIAM:*
Treating the suggestion for rehearing en banc as a petition for panel rehearing, the petition for panel rehearing is DENIED. In denying rehearing, the panel majority makes the following observation: The trial court utilized consolidation under rule 42 rather than class certification under rule 23 to manage this case. We review that decision for abuse of discretion and we find no abuse in this case. We are not called upon to decide whether the district court would have abused its discretion if it had elected to bifurcate liability issues that are common to the class and to certify for class determination those discreet liability issues. Judge Dennis dissents from the denial of panel rehearing.
The court having been polled at the request of one of its members and a majority of the judges who are in regular active service not having voted in favor (see Fed.R.App.P. 35, 5th Cir.R. 35), the suggestion for rehearing en banc is DENIED.

 Judge Duhé is recused and did not participate in the consideration of the suggestion for rehearing en banc.