Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Many commentators have argued that the Ninth Circuit faces several adverse consequences of its large size, [14] such as "unwieldly size, procedural inefficiencies, jurisprudential unpredictability, and unusual en banc process." [15] Chief among these is the Ninth Circuit's unique rules concerning the composition of an en banc court.
[6] The Ninth Circuit, with 29 judges, uses this procedure, and its en banc court consists of 11 judges. Theoretically, the Ninth Circuit can render en banc decisions with all 29 judges participating; such a hearing would overrule a prior 11-judge en banc hearing on the same case. Though no rule exists barring a party from requesting such a ...
Because of the large number of Appellate Judges in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (29), only ten judges, chosen at random, and the Chief Judge hear en banc cases. [9] Many decades ago, certain classes of federal court cases held the right of an automatic appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. That is, one of the parties in the ...
With two split panels in a row ruling in opposite ways, the case could be taken up by a 11-judge "en banc" panel of the 9th Circuit or appealed to the conservative U.S. Supreme Court, which has ...
Roommates.com, LLC, 521 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir. 2008), [1] is a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, sitting en banc, held that immunity under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) did not apply to an interactive online operator whose questionnaire violated the Fair Housing Act. However, the court ...
The day after the denial of stay, the 9th Circuit ordered the parties to submit supplemental briefs on whether the motion should be reheard en banc. [59] The order was issued at the request of an unidentified judge of the Ninth Circuit to be voted on by all 25 active judges (though, if successful, a rehearing would be by a panel of 11 judges).
Navajo Nation v. United States Forest Service, 479 F.3d 1024 (9th Cir. 2007), [1] reversed after rehearing en banc, 535 F.3d 1058 (9th Cir. 2008) [2] was brought to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in 2007.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the decision, but on rehearing en banc, reversed part of its decision. The en banc majority's opinion was written by Chief Judge Mary M. Schroeder, over the dissent of Judges Harry Pregerson, Alex Kozinski, Susan P. Graber, and William A. Fletcher.