Court Opinion

ID: 9770814
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 16:22:15.140576+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:21.023863
License: Public Domain

OPINION ON MOTIONS FOR REHEARING
SEERDEN, Justice.
Appellee and appellants filed motions for rehearing in the instant case. We granted the motions and permitted oral argument en banc.
Appellee’s first two points of error deal with the propriety of this Court’s rendering its original opinion en banc when the case had been originally heard by a three-judge panel, two of whom disagreed with the opinion. Because the case has now been submitted to the entire Court, these points are now moot.
We have carefully considered appellee’s remaining points of error on rehearing, points three through eleven, and believe our original opinion of October 10, 1991, adequately addresses the matters raised in these points. Consequently, we expressly adopt the original opinion of the Court and overrule appellee’s motion for rehearing.
In addition, having considered appellants’ motion for rehearing, we overrule it as well.