Loading…

Gabe Kaimowitz, Esquire, Qui Tam, Usa, Ex Rel. v. Orlando, Florida, Rick Bernhardt, Orlando Neighborhood Improvement Corporation, ("Onic") — freecase.ai

Opinion

Gabe Kaimowitz, Esquire, Qui Tam, Usa, Ex Rel. v. Orlando, Florida, Rick Bernhardt, Orlando Neighborhood Improvement Corporation, ("Onic")

131 F.3d 950 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 20, 1997

Full text

Gabe KAIMOWITZ, Esquire, Qui Tam, Plaintiff-Appellant, USA, Ex Rel., Plaintiff, v. ORLANDO, FLORIDA, Rick Bernhardt, Orlando Neighborhood Improvement Corporation, (“ONIC”), Defendants-Appellees

PER CURIAM: No member of this panel nor other judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the court be polled on Rehearing En Banc (Rule 35, Fed.R.App.P.; Eleventh Circuit Rule 35-5), the Suggestion of Rehearing En Banc is DENIED. On panel rehearing, the- last two sentences (including footnote 7) of the opinion are hereby deleted, and the following sentence is substituted in lieu thereof: For the reason discussed above, the record conclusively established that Kairnowitz was not entitled in this suit to the unrelated preliminary injunction he sought, and thus it was clear that an evidentiary hearing was not necessary. The petition for panel rehearing is DENIED in all respects except for the foregoing-amendment of the opinion.

Parentheticals

“A district court should not issue an injunction when the injunction in question is not of the same character, and deals with a matter lying wholly outside the issues in the suit.”
Morgan v. Thorton
“A district court should not issue an injunction when the injunction in question is not of the same character, and deals with a matter lying wholly outside the issues in the suit.”
Holland v. Williams
“A district court should not issue an injunction when the injunction in question is not of the same character, and deals with a matter lying wholly outside the issues in the suit.”
D'Amico v. Montoya
“A district court should not issue an injunction when the injunction in question is not of the same character, and deals with a matter lying wholly outside the issues in the suit.”
Rhodes v. City of Jacksonville, Florida
“A district court should not issue an injunction when the injunction in question is not of the same character, and deals with a matter lying wholly outside the issues in the suit.”
Chester v. Santa Rosa Correctional Institution
“A district court should not issue an injunction when the injunction in question is not of the same character, and deals with a matter lying wholly outside the issues in the suit.”
Johnson v. Garner
“A district court should not issue an injunction when the injunction in question is not of the same character, and deals with a matter lying wholly outside the issues in the suit.”
D'Amico v. Montoya
“A district court should not issue an injunction when the injunction in question is not of the same character, and deals with a matter lying wholly outside the issues in the suit.”
Sanders v. Inch
“A district court should not issue an injunction when the injunction in question is not of the same character, and deals with a matter lying wholly outside the issues in the suit.”
Gaffney v. Scibelli
“A district court should not issue an injunction when the injunction in question is not of the same character, and deals with a matter lying wholly outside the issues in the suit.”
Murzike v. Allen
“A district court should not issue an injunction when the injunction in question is not of the same character, and deals with a matter lying wholly outside the issues in the suit.”
Sanders v. Inch
“A district court should not issue an injunction when the injunction in question is not of the same character, and deals with a matter lying wholly outside the issues in the suit.”
Murzike v. Williams