91-3924 | 1st Cir. | Apr 12, 1994
20 F.3d 397" date_filed="1994-04-12" court="1st Cir." case_name="Resolution Trust Corp. v. Dunmar Corp. And Michael Jones">20 F.3d 397
RESOLUTION TRUST CORP., Plaintiff,
v.
DUNMAR CORP. and Michael D. Jones, Defendants-Counterclaim Plaintiffs,
The First F.A., Defendant-Counterclaim Defendant,
Sherman Dantzler and Jack Shirek, Defendants,
and
The First F.A. of Orlando and Resolution Trust Corp.,
Counter-Defendants.
Michael D. JONES; Robert S. Guskiewicz; R.S. Futch, Jr.,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
RESOLUTION TRUST CORP., Defendant-Third Party Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Philip DONLEVY; William Crawford; Robert Stone, Defendants,
v.
SEMINOLE FLYING AND SOARING, INC., and The First F.A. of
Orlando, Third Party Defendants.
RESOLUTION TRUST CORP., Plaintiff-Counter Defendant-Appellee,
v.
LAKE PICKETT, LTD., a Florida Limited Partnership; Michael
D. Jones, as general partner, d/b/a Lake Pickett, Ltd., a
Florida Limited Partnership; Michael D. Jones, individually
and as Trustee, Defendants-Counter-Plaintiffs-Appellants,
The First F.A. of Orlando, Defendant.
No. 91-3924.
United States Court of Appeals,
Eleventh Circuit.
April 12, 1994.
Broad and Cassel, Brenda Lee London, Robert D. Gatton, Orlando, FL, for appellants.
Giles, Hedrick & Robinson, P.A., Orlando, FL, E. Givens Goodspeed, Kirk K. Van Tine, Baker & Botts, Washington, DC, for appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida (Nos. 89-205-Civ-Orl-19, 89-207-Civ-Orl-19, 89-208-Civ-Orl-19), Patricia C. Fawsett, Judge.
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC
(Opinion November 23, 1993, 11th Cir., 1993, 7 F.3d 1006" date_filed="1993-11-23" court="1st Cir." case_name="Resolution Trust Corp. v. Dunmar Corp. And Michael Jones">7 F.3d 1006)
Before TJOFLAT, Chief Judge, KRAVITCH, HATCHETT, ANDERSON, EDMONDSON, COX, BIRCH, DUBINA, BLACK and CARNES, Circuit Judges.
BY THE COURT:
A member of this court in active service having requested a poll on the suggestion for rehearing en banc and a majority of the judges in this court in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en banc,
IT IS ORDERED that the above cause shall be reheard by this court en banc. The previous panel's opinion is hereby VACATED.