Filed: Apr. 12, 1994
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 20 F.3d 397, RESOLUTION TRUST CORP., Plaintiff, v.DUNMAR CORP. and Michael D. Jones, Defendants-Counterclaim Plaintiffs, The First F.A. William Crawford;, United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit., Broad and Cassel, Brenda Lee London, Robert D. Gatton, Orlando, FL, for appellants.
20 F.3d 397
RESOLUTION TRUST CORP., Plaintiff,
v.
DUNMAR CORP. and Michael D. Jones, Defendants-Counterclaim Plaintiffs,
The First F.A., Defendant-Counterclaim Defendant,
Sherman Dantzler and Jack Shirek, Defendants,
and
The First F.A. of Orlando and Resolution Trust Corp.,
Counter-Defendants.
Michael D. JONES; Robert S. Guskiewicz; R.S. Futch, Jr.,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
RESOLUTION TRUST CORP., Defendant-Third Party Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Philip DONLEVY; William Crawford; Robert Stone, Defendants,
v.
SEMINOLE FLYING AND SOARING, INC., and The First F.A. of
Orlando, Third Party Defendants.
RESOLUTION TRUST CORP., Plaintiff-Counter Defendant-Appellee,
v.
LAKE PICKETT, LTD., a Florida Limited Partnership; Michael
D. Jones, as general partner, d/b/a Lake Pickett, Ltd., a
Florida Limited Partnership; Michael D. Jones, individually
and as Trustee, Defendants-Counter-Plaintiffs-Appellants,
The First F.A. of Orlando, Defendant.
No. 91-3924.
United States Court of Appeals,
Eleventh Circuit.
April 12, 1994.
Broad and Cassel, Brenda Lee London, Robert D. Gatton, Orlando, FL, for appellants.
Giles, Hedrick & Robinson, P.A., Orlando, FL, E. Givens Goodspeed, Kirk K. Van Tine, Baker & Botts, Washington, DC, for appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida (Nos. 89-205-Civ-Orl-19, 89-207-Civ-Orl-19, 89-208-Civ-Orl-19), Patricia C. Fawsett, Judge.
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC
(Opinion November 23, 1993, 11th Cir., 1993, 7 F.3d 1006)
Before TJOFLAT, Chief Judge, KRAVITCH, HATCHETT, ANDERSON, EDMONDSON, COX, BIRCH, DUBINA, BLACK and CARNES, Circuit Judges.
BY THE COURT:
1
A member of this court in active service having requested a poll on the suggestion for rehearing en banc and a majority of the judges in this court in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en banc,
2
IT IS ORDERED that the above cause shall be reheard by this court en banc. The previous panel's opinion is hereby VACATED.
