Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. L.J. GARNER AND TOMMIE N. GARNER, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES.

PER CURIAM:

Supplementing our earlier opinion in United States v. Garner, 749 F.2d 281 (5th Cir. 1985), we note sua sponte that the district court, 567 F. Supp. 313, may wish to consider, in addition to the alternative already suggested in our earlier opinion, reentering the interlocutory order and thus triggering a new ten-day period for the government to pursue an appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). See Aucoin v. Matador Services, Inc., 749 F.2d 1180 (5th Cir. 1985); Aparicio v. Swan Lake, 643 F.2d 1109 (5th Cir. 1981). In the event that an appeal is so perfected, see § 1292(b); Fed.R.App.P. 5, there will be no necessity for further briefing, and the appeal will be referred to this panel for disposition.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

UNITED STATES v. GARNER
(Jan 18, 1985)