Filed: Dec. 15, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: REVISED 12/15/99 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 97-20948 _ JOYCE RILEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus ST. LUKE'S EPISCOPAL HOSPITAL; DR. BRANISLAV RADOVANCEVIC; O. HOWARD FRAZIER, M.D.; SURGICAL ASSOCIATES OF TEXAS, P.A.; UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER AT HOUSTON; BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE; TEXAS HEART INSTITUTE; and EDWARD K. MASSIN, M.D., Defendants-Appellees. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas _ (Opini
Summary: REVISED 12/15/99 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 97-20948 _ JOYCE RILEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus ST. LUKE'S EPISCOPAL HOSPITAL; DR. BRANISLAV RADOVANCEVIC; O. HOWARD FRAZIER, M.D.; SURGICAL ASSOCIATES OF TEXAS, P.A.; UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER AT HOUSTON; BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE; TEXAS HEART INSTITUTE; and EDWARD K. MASSIN, M.D., Defendants-Appellees. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas _ (Opinio..
More
REVISED 12/15/99 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _______________ No. 97-20948 _______________ JOYCE RILEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus ST. LUKE'S EPISCOPAL HOSPITAL; DR. BRANISLAV RADOVANCEVIC; O. HOWARD FRAZIER, M.D.; SURGICAL ASSOCIATES OF TEXAS, P.A.; UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER AT HOUSTON; BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE; TEXAS HEART INSTITUTE; and EDWARD K. MASSIN, M.D., Defendants-Appellees. _________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas _________________________ (Opinion November 15, 1999, 5 Cir., ___ F.3d ___) November 15, 1999 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, JONES, SMITH, WIENER, BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, STEWART, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.* * Chief Judge King is recused and did not participate in this matter. BY THE COURT: The internal policies of this court provide for the pre-circulation, to all non-recused active judges, of a proposed panel opinion that will create a circuit split. Those policies also allow any active judge to request, before the opinion is issued, a poll on whether the case should be reheard en banc after the opinion is issued. A member of the court in regular active service having requested a poll pursuant to that policy, and a majority of the judges in regular active service having voted in favor of granting rehearing en banc, IT IS ORDERED that this cause shall be reheard by the court en banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. The Clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.