James Barlow Family Ltd. Partnership v. David M. Munson, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
The Barlows have filed a motion to clarify our order and opinion on rehearing. Because our mandate issued on November 21, 1997, we treat the motion as one to recall the mandate. Under our inherent authority to recall the mandate for the purpose of clarifying an ambiguous prior order of the court, see Coleman v. Turpen, 827 F.2d 667, 671 (10th Cir.1987); Dilley v. Alexander, 627 F.2d 407, 410-411 (D.C.Cir.1980), we grant the motion and recall the mandate.
We clarify the opinion by eliminating the phrase on page 3 stating that we grant summary judgment in favor of Munson and by stating…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Dilley v. AlexanderCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
- Charles T. Coleman, Sr. v. Michael C. TurpenCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1987
3Cited by33 opinions
- Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Farm Credit Bank of WichitaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000
- Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Hartford Casualty InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2002
- Sanpete Water Conservancy District v. Carbon Water Conservancy DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000
- Deaton v. GutierrezNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2003
- COMMON CAUSE OF COLORADO v. BuescherDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 2010
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.