CAVANAUGH

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• LEE Cnty. Branch OF the NAACP v. The City OF Opelika, 748 F.2d 1473 (11th Cir. 1984)
  …the defendants have had an adequate opportunity to develop a record with the results standard in mind. Fairness dictates that the case be remanded.12 [*1481] Moreover, a remand is consistent with the Supreme Court’s action in Cross v. Baxter, 1983, 460 U.S. 1065, 103 S.Ct. 1515, 75 L.Ed.2d 942 (mem.), vacating 688 F. 2d 279, 5 Cir.1982, which vacated a finding of unconstitutional vote dilution under Mobile and Rogers and remanded “for further consideration in light of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act ...…
• Hefner v. Alexander, 779 F.2d 277 (5th Cir. 1985)
  …the district court that it had no subject matter jurisdiction to review a disciplinary case. The United States Supreme Court vacated our holding and remanded the case for reconsideration in light of Feldman, which had recently been decided. Howell, 460 U.S. 1065, 103 S.Ct. 1515, 75 L.Ed.2d 942 (1983). On remand, we partially reinstituted our prior decision to remand to the district court. Howell, 710 F. 2d 1075 (5th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 950, 104 S.Ct. 2152, 80 L.Ed.2d 538 (1984). Feldman di…
• Howell v. State BAR OF Tex., 843 F.2d 205 (5th Cir. 1988)
  …upreme Court, specifically Disciplinary Rule (DR) 1-102(A)(5). We affirm. Recitals of the facts giving rise to this much-protracted litigation may be found in Howell v. State Bar of Texas, 674 F. 2d 1027, 1028-29 (5th Cir.1982) (Howell I), vacated, 460 U.S. 1065, 103 S.Ct. 1515, 75 L.Ed.2d 942 (1983), Howell v. State, 559 S.W. 2d 432 (Tex.Civ.App.1977, writ ref’d n.r.e.), and Ex parte Howell, 488 S.W. 2d 123 (Tex.Crim.App.1972). We will not repeat them. In Howell I, we reversed the district court’s dismis…

  ← 1 / 2 →