204 F.3d 573 (4th Cir. 2000), 98-2225, Johnson v Collins Entertainment Co.

Docket Nº:98-2225(L), (CA-97-2136-3-17).
Citation:204 F.3d 573
Party Name:JOAN CALDWELL JOHNSON; LORRAINE WITHERSPOON BAKER; DANNY KAY SMITH; SARA EDELL BOAN; DEANNA KAY FRANS; DARRYL BERNARD EPPS; ANDREW NOBLES; JOSEPH CHESTER WALKER; WILLIAM JOSEPH HARNETT, JR.; BRUCE ANDERSON; WILLIAM BELL; FAYE BLAYLOCK; MIKE BREWER; MIKE BROWN; Page 574 RONALD CALLAHAN; SANDRA COULTER; LISA CRUM; ANDREAS DRUTIS; CRYSTAL GAYLE EDWA
Case Date:March 09, 2000
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 573

204 F.3d 573 (4th Cir. 2000)

JOAN CALDWELL JOHNSON; LORRAINE WITHERSPOON BAKER; DANNY KAY SMITH; SARA EDELL BOAN; DEANNA KAY FRANS; DARRYL BERNARD EPPS; ANDREW NOBLES; JOSEPH CHESTER WALKER; WILLIAM JOSEPH HARNETT, JR.; BRUCE ANDERSON; WILLIAM BELL; FAYE BLAYLOCK; MIKE BREWER; MIKE BROWN;

Page 574

RONALD CALLAHAN; SANDRA COULTER; LISA CRUM; ANDREAS DRUTIS; CRYSTAL GAYLE EDWARDS; BUSTER ELFIN FLOYD; GEORGE HENLEY; LORETTA JONES; MARGARET LOCKLEAR; TAMMY LOCKLEAR; LINDA MCCLEOD; WILLIAM MCCORMICK; HUGH MEISE; PATTY MILLER; GARY PADGETT; MARY PINCHBACK; VARDRY PITTMAN; ALBERT J. SAMRA; MASON SKEENES; JIM STOLZ; AMBER STRICKLAND; CHARLES STUBBS; LONYA THIGPEN; JAMES THOMPSON; JESSIE WILLIAMS; VALERIE WILLIAMS, and on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated; STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; ex rel, CHARLES M. CONDON, in his official capacity as Attorney General, Plaintiffs - Appellees,

v.

COLLINS ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY, INCORPORATED; AMERICAN AMUSEMENT COMPANY, INCORPORATED; AMERICAN AMUSEMENT OF AIKEN, INCORPORATED; JOYTIME DISTRIBUTORS & AMUSEMENT, INCORPORATED; RED DOT AMUSEMENTS; CBA GAMES, INCORPORATED; BEST AMUSEMENT COMPANY; GREENWOOD MUSIC COMPANY, INCORPORATED; ACE AMUSEMENT, LLC; B&J AMUSEMENT; BROYLES & LUTZ, INCORPORATED; CAROUSEL AMUSEMENTS; COLEY, INCORPORATED; DREW INDUSTRIES; FAST FREDDIES; GREAT GAMES, INCORPORATED; H&J OF SOUTH CAROLINA, INCORPORATED; HOLLIDAY AMUSEMENT COMPANY OF CHARLESTON, INCORPORATED; HOYTS MUSIC COMPANY, INCORPORATED; HUCKLEBERRY AMUSEMENT, INCORPORATED; INGRAM INVESTMENTS; J. M. BROWN AMUSEMENT COMPANY, INCORPORATED; LARRY WOLFE AMUSEMENT; MHJ CORPORATION; MHS ENTERPRISES, INCORPORATED; MARTIN COIN MACHINE, INCORPORATED; MCDONALD AMUSEMENT COMPANY; MIDLANDS GAMING CORPORATION; ORANGEBURG AMUSEMENT, INCORPORATED; PEDROLAND, INCORPORATED; R. L. JORDAN OIL COMPANY OF NORTH CAROLINA; ROSEMARY COIN MACHINES OF FLORENCE, INCORPORATED; SCOTT'S VENDING INCORPORATED OF COLUMBIA; SUMTER PETROLEUM COMPANY; TIM'S AMUSEMENT, INCORPORATED; VIDEO-MATIC AMUSEMENTS, INCORPORATED; H. HUGH ANDREWS, II; PAMELA A. ANDREWS; DWAYNE I. BOHANNON; J. M. BROWN; DON E. BROYLES; GRACE E. COLEY; FRED COLLINS; J. SAMUEL COX; KENNETH G. FLOWE; CAREY HARDEE; SCOTT G. HOGUE; LOWELL E. HOLDEN; PATRICIA HOLLIDAY; WARREN P. HOLLIDAY; HENRY E. INGRAM; STEVEN E. LIPSCOMB; TIM MAHON; JIMMY MARTIN, JR.; CYNTHIA MCDONALD; JAMES MCDONALD; ALLAN SCHAEFER; DAVID R. SIMPSON; RON SPENCER; MICKEY H. STACKS; WILLIAM DARWIN WHEELER; HERSHEL L. WILLIAMSON; A. J. WILSON, JR., in their individual and corporate capacities as representatives of all others similarly situated, Defendants - Appellants.

No. 98-2225(L), (CA-97-2136-3-17).

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

March 9, 2000

Filed.

ARGUED: Dwight Franklin Drake, NELSON, MULLINS, RILEY & SCARBOROUGH, L.L.P., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellants. William Allen Nickles, III, GERGEL, NICKLES & SOLOMON, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. ON BRIEF: A. Camden Lewis, LEWIS, BABCOCK & HAWKINS, L.L.P., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellants Ace Amusement, et al.; Richard A. Harpootlian, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellants Coley, et al.; David E. Belding, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellants MHS Enterprises and Stacks; J. Brent Kiker, KIKER & DOUDS, Beaufort, South Carolina, for Appellants Ingram Investments and Ingram; Matthew A. Henderson, HENDERSON, BRANDT & VIETH, Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellant Jordan Oil; J. Boone Aiken, III, AIKEN, NUNN, ELLIOTT & TYLER, Florence, South Carolina; James B. Richardson, Jr., RICHARDSON & BIRDSONG, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant Pedroland; O. W. Bannister, James W. Bannister, HILL, WYATT & BANNISTER, Greenville, South Carolina; Russell D. Ghent, LEATHERWOOD, WALKER, TODD & MANN, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellants Collins Amusement and Collins. Richard M. Gergel, Carl L. Solomon, David E. Rothstein, GERGEL, NICKLES & SOLOMON, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina; Lawrence E. Richter, Jr., Saul Gliserman, David K. Haller, THE RICHTER FIRM, P.A., Mount Pleasant, South Carolina; R. Randall Bridwell, Columbia, South Carolina; Richard K. Walker, STREICH LANG, Phoenix, Arizona; J. P. Strom, Jr., Thomas R. Young, Jr., STROM, YOUNG & THURMOND, L.L.P., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Before: Judges Murnaghan, Michael, Motz, and King voted to grant rehearing en banc. Chief Judge Wilkinson, and Judges Widener, Niemeyer, and Luttig voted to deny rehearing en banc. Judges Wilkins, Williams, and Traxler did not participate in the poll of the Court on the suggestion for rehearing en banc. DIANA GRIBBON MOTZ, Circuit Judge, dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc. WILKINSON, Chief Judge, concurring in the denial of rehearing en banc.

ORDER

Appellees filed a petition for rehearing with suggestion for rehearing en banc.

The panel voted to deny rehearing.

A member of the Court requested a poll on the suggestion for rehearing en banc. Judges Murnaghan, Michael, Motz, and King voted to grant rehearing en banc. Chief Judge Wilkinson, and Judges Widener, Niemeyer, and Luttig voted to deny rehearing en banc. Judges Wilkins, Williams, and Traxler did not participate in the poll of the Court on the suggestion for rehearing en banc. As the petition for rehearing en banc failed to receive the support of the majority of judges in regular active service, it is hereby DENIED.

Entered at the direction of Chief Judge Wilkinson for the Court.

Page 575

WILKINSON, Chief Judge, concurring in the denial of rehearing en banc:

I concur in the denial of rehearing en banc. My dissenting colleague endorses the unbounded assertion of federal judicial power over core state functions that the actions of the district court reflect. Such a view is utterly irreconcilable with the principles underlying our system of dual sovereignty. Under the dissent's approach, the federal chancellor's control over basic state functions will be unfettered and complete.

I shall not review in detail all of the points in the panel opinion. See Johnson v. Collins Entertainment Co., 199 F.3d 710 (4th Cir. 1999). Rather, I will...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP