Daniel P. Cotter v. Patricia Roberts Harris, Secretary of Health and Human Services
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
1DissentGarth, Circuit Judge
Judge Sloviter, in her opinion Sur Petition for Rehearing Before Panel, states: “The usual, and we believe preferred, practice where the opinions of the panel have already been expressed in majority and dissenting opinions is to rule without opinion on a motion for panel rehearing.” She also expresses regret for “this proliferation of opinions.” I do not, however, know of any such “usual” and “preferred” practice. To the contrary, I have always believed that when vital information such as that now furnished by the Secretary is made available to us in a filed petition, a judge of this court…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Daniel P. Cotter v. Patricia Roberts Harris, Secretary of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1981
- George Dobrowolsky v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary, Health, Education, and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1979
- Steadman v. Securities & Exchange CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Jose E. Baerga v. Elliot Richardson, Individually and as Secretary of Health, Education AndwelfareCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1974
- National Labor Relations Board v. Pincus Brothers, Inc.-MaxwellCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.