Legal Opinion
Zipfel v. Halliburton Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided November 16, 1988No. Nos. 86-1815, 86-1832, 86-1834 to 86-1836PublishedCited by 71 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DAVID R. THOMPSON, Circuit Judge:
Defendants-appellees Halliburton Company, et al. (“Halliburton”), move this court to recall the mandate, issued pursuant to our amended opinion in this case, Zipfel v. Halliburton Co., 832 F.2d 1477 (9th Cir.1987). Halliburton contends that our opinion conflicts with the subsequent decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Chick Karri Choo v. Exxon Corp., — U.S.-, 108 S.Ct. 1684, 100 L.Ed.2d 127 (1988). We agree. We order the mandate recalled and we amend our opinion as set out below.
1. Authority to Recall Mandate
The authority of a Court of Appeals…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Gulf Oil Corp. v. GilbertSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Lauritzen v. LarsenSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Chick Kam Choo v. Exxon Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Briggs v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Hellenic Lines Ltd. v. RhoditisSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by71 opinions
- United States v. William D. Davis, United States of America v. Curry James WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Nevius v. SumnerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- Western Systems, Inc. Lee M. Holmes v. Richard F. Ulloa David J. UlloaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Eric Scott Patterson v. Thomas B. Haskins, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2006
- Thompson v. CalderonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
66 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.