Case law · Appeals court · Federal

Thaddeus-X and Earnest Bell, Jr. v. Blatter

Decided
March 8, 1999
Docket
95-1837
Status
Published
Jurisdiction
Federal

Cited 2,642 timesOverruled on other grounds (verified)Overruled on other grounds (verified) · Howell v. Gonzalez

What later courts said

Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.

How the opinion begins

PER CURIAM.

The en banc court is divided in this case, but not equally. Eight members of the court favor a decision to affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand in accordance with the opinion written by Judge Moore. There are three separate opinions concurring in part and dissenting in part from Judge Moore’s opinion, which the eight other members of the court join in varying combinations.[1]

Judge Kennedy (joined by Judges Boggs, Suhrheinrich, and Batchelder) dissents from Part III.A.4. of Judge Moore’s opinion, insofar as it concludes that defendants Graham, Bildner, and Blatter are potentially liable to plaintiffs. Judge Kennedy’s opinion accepts defendant Karazim as potentially liable to Thaddeus-X. The rest of the court accepts the potential lia [*383] bility of not only Karazim but also of the three other defendants.

Statutes cited

Cite this

Thaddeus-X and Earnest Bell, Jr. v. Blatter, 175 F.3d 378 (1999)

Read the full opinion

Free account needed

Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.