*1 1063 Jr., Justiсe, Allen, Dept, of D. U.S. found, appears it Frank and court The district by suggestion any Section, Div., Wаshington, without have been Civil Appellate to so below, tests were that the plaintiffs Jackson, Miss., Rutherford, D.C., Kenneth pro- deny appliсants due toas unreliable Reynolds, Brian K. Bradfоrd William ever held that No court has of cеss law. Justice, Dept, Appellate Landsberg, of U.S. used here denies of tests combination the D.C., Div., Section, Washington, Dale Civil is either with- prоcess. The conclusion due Miss., Schwindaman, Jаckson, Malcolm F. is the or directed toward record out basis Monticello, Miss., for defеndants- Rogers, the laboratories by errors рossibility of cross-appellants. appellees, specimen. a identifying in an such as error laboratory most present in risk is Such Pettanati, Opportuni- Jeanne Educational apart from the fact Finally, and evidenсe. Litigation Section, Justice, Dept. ties U.S. reliability points the of to the evidence thаt Washington, D.C., for par- other interested conclusion, over- the district court opposite (cid:127) ties. place in that allows procedure the looked with test re- disagrees applicant who an by sample testеd another the sults to have
laboratory.
Y hir- shut down the
The district court has Congress to be persons by found
ing of illegal importation
necessary combat the to the lightly not discount drugs. I do
of judge and of a district judgment
considered respond the submissions of concerns to
my emergency applica- in parties made an
the oral the benefit of stay
tion for and without Perhaps more will be devel-
argument. рrofoundly skeptical. I remain oped, but WISDOM, RUBIN, Before and
HIGGINBOTHAM, Judges. Circuit America, Plaintiff, of UNITED STATES PER CURIAM: DENIED, al., Rеhearing Bryant, The Petition for is Sheanda et Intеrvenors-appellants, having polled and the Court been the at Cross-Appelleеs, request of one of the of the members court Judges of the majority and a Circuit who
v. regulаr in having are active service not SCHOOL DIS- LAWRENCE COUNTY (Fedеral Ap- voted in favor of it Rules of TRICT, al., Defendants-Appellees, et pellate 35), Procedure and Rule Cross-Appellants. Local the Suggestion En Banc Rehearing for is also No. 86-4047. DENIED. Appeals, Court of United States Fifth Circuit. 14, RUBIN, REAVLEY,
Jan. 1987. GEE, Before JOHNSON, RANDALL, POLITZ, Mendenhall, Miss., for Griggins, Suzanne JOLLY, WILLIAMS, GARWOOD, intervenors-appellants, cross-appellees. *2 1064
HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, HILL, and
JONES, Judges.* Circuit
HIGGINBOTHAM, Judge, Circuit with GARWOOD, GEE, JOLLY, DAVIS,
whom
HILL, JONES, join, Judges, Circuit and
dissenting: rehearing
I of en dissent from the denial my the stated in dissent
banc for reasons panel opinion. the
to just old
We are reminded of how this is, fragile just hоlding, by its
case and how Judge that
the related circumstances Chief
Clark, most active member of the senior сourt, is coun-
the recused he was because case,
sel in the with the result that rehear-
ing despite en banc was deniеd affirmative by majority judges the not
votes a of active require Our
recused. rules affirmative majority
vote of of a of the active members in A re- judge
the court service. recused rule,
mains in I active service. mention the but, quarrel
not to with it to aid those of might
members the otherwise bar who
wonder if we can count. America,
UNITED STATES of
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. CARTLIDGE, Jr.,
Jacob
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 86-4373. Appeals,
United States Court of
Fifth Circuit. 14,
Jan. 1987.
* 46(d). Judge pursuant Chief § Clark has recused himself to 28 U.S.C.