Legal Opinion

Comer v. Murphy Oil USA

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided May 28, 2010No. 07-60756PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER:

This case was voted en banc by a duly constituted quorum of the court consisting of nine members in regular active service who are not disqualified. Fed. R.App. P. 35(a); 28 U.S.C. § 46(d).

The grant of rehearing en banc in this case “vacate[d] the panel opinion and judgment of the court and stay[ed] the-mandate.” 5th Cir. R. 41.3.; see also Thompson v. Connick, 578 F.3d 293 (5th Cir.2009) (en banc) (same).

After the en banc court was properly constituted, new circumstances *1054arose that caused the disqualification and recusal of one of the nine judges, leaving only eight judges in regular…

Also in this document: Dissent.

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Nguyen v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
  2. Thompson v. ConnickCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2009
  3. United States v. Walter L. Nixon, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1987
  4. Tobin, Secretary of Labor v. RameyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1953

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Comer v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2013
  2. North Carolina State Conference of NAACP v. McCroryDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2016
  3. Asgeirsson v. Texas Attorney GeneralCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2012
  4. Comer v. Murphy Oil Usa, Inc.District Court, S.D. Mississippi · 2012
  5. Abraham Watkins v. FesterygaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2025

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API