Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

86-7898 (1988)

Court: Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Number: 86-7898 Visitors: 8
Filed: Aug. 26, 1988
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary:  Sec. L. Rep. P 94, 064James L. SHORES, Jr., Executor of the Estate of Clarence E.Bishop, Jr., on behalf of himself and all other persons whopurchased First Mortgage 8% Revenue Bonds issued by theIndustrial Board of the Town of Frisco City, Alabama, Plaintiff-Appellant, v.Jerald H. SKLAR, et al.

855 F.2d 722

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,064
James L. SHORES, Jr., Executor of the Estate of Clarence E.
Bishop, Jr., on behalf of himself and all other persons who
purchased First Mortgage 8% Revenue Bonds issued by the
Industrial Board of the Town of Frisco City, Alabama,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Jerald H. SKLAR, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 86-7898.

United States Court of Appeals,
Eleventh Circuit.

Aug. 26, 1988.

W. Eugene Rutledge, Rutledge & Kelly, Birmingham, Ala., for plaintiff-appellant.

Crawford S. McGivaren, Jr., Cabaniss, Johnston, Gardner, Dumas & O'Neal, Larry B. Childs, Birmingham, Ala., for Jerald H. Sklar, et al.

Lee H. Zell, Berkowitz, Lefkovits, Isom & Kushner, Susan Salonimer, Birmingham, Ala., for Asa G. Candler.

Frank M. Young, III, Haskell, Slaughter & Young, James L. Richey, Birmingham, Ala., for Cecil J. Lamberson & Jackson Municipals, Inc.

Hobart A. McWhorter, Jr., Bradley, Arant, Rose & White, Richard H. Walston, Henry E. Simpson, Lange, Simpson, Robinson & Somerville, Birmingham, Ala., for Capell, Howard, Knabe & Cobbs.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, James Hughes Hancock, Judge.

1

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING IN BANC

2

(Opinion May 10, 1988, 11th Cir., 1988, 844 F.2d 1485)

3

Before RONEY, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT, HILL, FAY, KRAVITCH, JOHNSON, HATCHETT, ANDERSON, CLARK, EDMONDSON, and COX, Circuit Judges*.

BY THE COURT:

4

A member of this court in active service having requested a poll on the application for rehearing in banc and a majority of the judges in this court in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing in banc,

5

IT IS ORDERED that the above cause shall be reheard by this court in banc with oral argument during the week of October 17, 1988, on a date hereafter to be fixed. The clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of in banc briefs. The previous panel's opinion is hereby VACATED.

*

Judge Vance is recused and did not participate in this decision

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer