Legal Opinion · Dissent
Abril-Rivera v. Johnson
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Decided November 17, 2015No. 14-1316OUnknown
1DissentTorruella, Circuit Judge
I dissent from the withdrawal of the opinion and effective denial of panel rehearing. The majority here uses withdrawal and revision as a tactic for avoiding a rehearing en banc. This maneuver is merely the i converse of that to which I objected in Igartúa v. United States, 626 F.3d 592, 612 n. 21 (1st Cir.2010).
The disposition to reach a pre-deter-mined outcome in this case has been self-evident for some time. It was clearly demonstrated by the majority’s ruling in its original panel opinion, which was principally based on its motu proprio raising of the so-called safe harbor defense, see 42…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- 29 Fair empl.prac.cas. 442, 29 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 32,851, 10 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1410 Curtis Jackson, W. C. McClendon Lige Scretchen, Nathaniel Cooper and W. E. Parker, Cross-Appellants v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company, Brotherhood Railway Carmen of the United States and Canada, Cross-Appellee. Curtis Jackson, W. C. McClendon Lige Scretchen v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad, Co., Brotherhood Railway Carmen of the United States and CanadaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1982
- Knapp Shoes, Inc. v. Sylvania Shoe Manufacturing Corp.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1994
- Igartúa v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2010
- Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Juan Jesus Ramirez-RiveraCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
- Abril-Rivera v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2015