Hale v. State of Mississippi, et al

Filing

PUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [07-60997 Affirmed] Judge: EGJ , Judge: JES , Judge: PRO. Mandate pull date is 11/04/2010; granting motion for partial dismissal of appeal filed by Appellees NFN McCleave, NFN Woodall, NFN Trinca and Wexford Health Services [6548554-2], granting motion for partial dismissal of appeal filed by Appellee Mr. Patrick Arnold [6548371-2]; dismissing as moot motion requesting the court to enter an order which first adjudicates filed by Appellees NFN McCleave, NFN Woodall, NFN Trinca and Wexford Health Services [6548554-3] [07-60997]

Hale v. State of Mississippi, et al

Doc. 0 Att. 1

Case: 07-60997

Document: 00511263585

Page: 1

Date Filed: 10/14/2010

United States Court of Appeals
F IF T H C IR C U IT O F F I C E O F TH E C L E R K LYLE W . CAYCE CLERK T E L . 504-310-7700 6 0 0 S. M A E S T R I PLA C E N E W O R L E A N S , LA 70130

October 14, 2010 MEMORANDUM TO COUNSEL OR PARTIES LISTED BELOW Regarding: Fifth Circuit Statement on Petitions for Rehearing or Rehearing En Banc

No. 07-60997, Hale v. State of Mississippi, et al USDC No. 2:06-CV-245 --------------------------------------------------Enclosed is a copy of the court's decision. The court has entered judgment under FED. R. APP. P. 36. (However, the opinion may yet contain typographical or printing errors which are subject to correction.) FED. R. APP. P. 39 through 41, and 5T H CIR. RULES 35, 39, and 41 govern costs, rehearings, and mandates. 5T H CIR. RULES 35 and 40 require you to attach to your petition for panel rehearing or rehearing en banc an unmarked copy of the court's opinion or order. Please read carefully the Internal Operating Procedures (IOP's) following FED. R. APP. P. 40 and 5T H CIR. R. 35 for a discussion of when a rehearing may be appropriate, the legal standards applied and sanctions which may be imposed if you make a nonmeritorious petition for rehearing en banc. Direct Criminal Appeals . 5T H CIR. R. 41 provides that a motion for a stay of mandate under FED. R. APP. P. 41 will not be granted simply upon request. The petition must set forth good cause for a stay or clearly demonstrate that a substantial question will be presented to the Supreme Court. Otherwise, this court may deny the motion and issue the mandate immediately. Pro Se Cases . If you were unsuccessful in the district court and/or on appeal, and are considering filing a petition for certiorari in the United States Supreme Court, you do not need to file a motion for stay of mandate under FED. R. APP. P. 41. The issuance of the mandate does not affect the time, or your right, to file with the Supreme Court. Sincerely, LYLE W. CAYCE, Clerk By:_________________________ Jamei R. Cheramie, Deputy Clerk Enclosures Ms. Diana Katherine Flynn Ms. Pelicia E. Hall Robert Lawson Holladay Sr. Mr. Charles Baron Irvin Mr. Jeffrey Scott Levinger Mr. Joseph A. O'Connell III Mr. Dirk Christian Phillips Mr. Vardaman Kimball Smith III Ms. Katie Lofton Wallace

Dockets.Justia.com