Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
John R. Nichols, and Irene Nichols, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Petroleum Helicopters, Inc., et al., Defendants.jimmie John Miller, Jr., and Jolain Miller, Plaintiffs-appellants, v. Petroleum Helicopters, Inc., et al., Defendants-appellees
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. - 995 F.2d 85
Aug. 17, 1993
M. Terrance Hoychick, Young, Hoychick & Aguillard, Eunice, LA, for Miller, et al.
Kenneth H. Laborde, Mary Garvey Algero, Pulaksi, Gieger & Laborde, New Orleans, LA, for defendant/defendants-appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, Nauman S. Scott, Judge.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
While no motion for rehearing was filed in this case, another member of our court has questioned the propriety of disposition of this case on the summary calendar and requested the clerk to hold the issuance of any mandate in this case. While the panel adheres to its original view that this case was appropriate for summary calendar disposition, we also recognize that the concerns expressed by our colleague are reasonable, and that the appropriate course to follow when reasonable doubts are raised is to permit reconsideration which would eliminate those doubts.
Accordingly, we withdraw the opinion dated July 14, 1993, 995 F.2d 82; and instruct the clerk to withdraw the mandate issued herein; and classify this case as III for further consideration by an oral argument panel.