VIEUX v. EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DIST.

Nos. 87-2509, 87-15171.

906 F.2d 1330 (1990)

Bob VIEUX; Joyce Vieux; Donald Vieux, Executor of Zwissig Estate; Ralph Pombo; Bob Frick; Gordon Griffith; Marianne Griffith; Kathleen Brockman; Nancy Burr; Miguel Franco; Joe Jess; Paul Marciel; Don Scullion, Executor of Greeley Estate; Antonio Martin; Don Brooks; Edward Depaoli; Ray Peterson; Antonette Egan; Ferma Corporation, a California corporation; Rancho Arroyo De La Alameda, a general partnership, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT, a body politic, Defendant-Appellee. Bob VIEUX; Joyce Vieux; Donald Vieux, Executor of Zwissig Estate; Ralph Pombo; Bob Frick; Gordon Griffith; Marianne Griffith; Kathleen Brockman; Nancy Burr; Miguel Franco; Joe Jess; Paul Marciel; Don Scullion, Executor of Greeley Estate; Antonio Martin; Don Brooks; Edward Depaoli; Ray Peterson; Antonette Egan; Ferma Corporation, a California corporation; Rancho Arroyo De La Alameda, a general partnership, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT, a body politic, Defendant, and County of Alameda, a political division of the State of California; Southern Pacific Transportation Company, a Delaware corporation; Santa Fe Pacific Realty Corporation, a Delaware corporation; Robert T. Knox; and John George, Defendants-Appellees.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Opinion January 10, 1990.

Opinion Withdrawn June 26, 1990.

Decided June 26, 1990.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Joseph M. Gughemetti, Joseph M. Gughemetti, A Professional Corp., San Mateo, Cal., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Les A. Hausrath, Wendel, Rosen, Black, Dean & Levitan, Oakland, Cal., for defendant-appellee East Bay Regional Park Dist.

John R. Reese, McCutchen Doyle Brown & Enersen, San Francisco, Cal., for defendants-appellees County of Alameda, Southern Pacific Transp. Co., Santa Fe Pacific Realty Corp., Robert T. Knox, and John George.

Before FERGUSON, BRUNETTI and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.


ORDER

The opinion filed January 10, 1990 is withdrawn.

The panel voted to deny the petition for rehearing and reject the suggestion for rehearing en banc.

The full court has been advised of the suggestion for en banc rehearing, and no judge of the court has requested a vote on the suggestion for rehearing en banc. Fed.R.App.P. 35(b).

The petition for rehearing is DENIED and the suggestion for a rehearing en banc is REJECTED.

OPINION...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases