Susan Lewis v. Humboldt Acquisition Corporati
OPINION and JUDGMENT filed: The judgment of the district court against Lewis is REVERSED and the case is REMANDED for a new trial. Decision for publication pursuant to local rule 206. Alice M. Batchelder, Chief Circuit Judge; Boyce F. Martin , Jr., Danny J. Boggs, Karen Nelson Moore, R. Guy Cole , Jr., Eric L. Clay, Julia Smith Gibbons, John M. Rogers, Jeffrey S. Sutton, Deborah L. Cook, David W. McKeague, Richard Allen Griffin, Raymond M. Kethledge, Helene N. White, Jane Branstetter Stranch, and Bernice Bouie Donald, Circuit Judges. (SUTTON, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which BATCHELDER, C. J., BOGGS, GIBBONS, ROGERS, COOK, McKEAGUE, GRIFFIN, and KETHLEDGE, JJ. joined. CLAY, J. (pp. 16-21), delivered a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, in which MARTIN, J., joined. STRANCH, J. (pp. 22-31), delivered a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, in which MOORE, COLE, and WHITE, JJ., joined. DONALD, J. (pp. 32-47), delivered a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.)
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
May 25, 2012
Plaintiff - Appellant,
LEONARD GREEN, Clerk
HUMBOLDT ACQUISITION CORPORATION, INC.,
dba Humboldt Manor Nursing Home,
Defendant - Appellee.
Before: BATCHELDER, Chief Judge; MARTIN, BOGGS, MOORE, COLE, CLAY,
GIBBONS, ROGERS, SUTTON, COOK, McKEAGUE, GRIFFIN, KETHLEDGE, WHITE,
STRANCH, and DONALD, Circuit Judges.
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Tennessee at Jackson.
UPON CONSIDERATION of the petition for rehearing en banc, the supplemental briefs,
and arguments of counsel,
IN CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, it is ORDERED that the judgment of the district
court against Lewis is REVERSED and the case is REMANDED for a new trial.
ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT
Leonard Green, Clerk
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?