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

CARL M. SEIBERT, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. D. T. BAPTIST, DISTRICT DIRECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE ET. AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING [2] (Opinion May 3, 1979, 5 Cir., 1979, 594 F.2d 423)

PER CURIAM:

On May 3, 1979, we affirmed Seibert v. Baptist on the basis of the United States District Judge's Memorandum of Opinion. Relying on our en banc decision, Davis v. Passman, 571 F.2d 793 (5th Cir. 1978), the lower court refused to recognize an implied private cause of action for damages under the due process clause of the fifth amendment. In Davis v. Passman, ___ U.S. ___, 99 S.Ct. 2264, 60 L.Ed.2d 846 (1979), a ruling announced on June 5, 1979, however, the United States Supreme Court reversed our en banc decision and found that a cause of action as well as a damages remedy could be implied under the due process clause of the fifth amendment. We therefore reverse and remand to the district court.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

SEIBERT, v. BAPTIST
(Sep 21, 1979)