Community State Bank v. Strong
| Decision Date | 20 April 2009 |
| Docket Number | No. 06-11582.,06-11582. |
| Citation | 565 F.3d 1305 |
| Parties | COMMUNITY STATE BANK, Cash America Financial Services, Inc., Cash America International, Inc., Georgia Cash America, Inc., Daniel R. Feehan, Petitioners-Appellants, v. James STRONG, Respondent-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit |
John G. Parker, Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker, LLP, Christopher J. Willis, Daniel D. Zegura, Richard H. Sinkfield, Rogers & Hardin, LLP, Atlanta, GA, Alan S. Kaplinsky, Ballard, Spahr, Andrews & Ingersoll, LLP, Philadelphia, PA, for Petitioners-Appellants.
Roy E. Barnes, John Raymond Bevis, The Barnes Law Group, Marietta, GA, Jennifer Auer Jordan, Pate & Brody, LLP, Atlanta, GA, for Respondent-Appellee.
Imre Stephen Szalai, Cal. Western Sch. of Law, San Diego, CA, Pierre H. Bergeron, Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, L.L.P., Cincinnati, OH, Mark C. Dosker, Squire, Sanders & Dempey, San Francisco, CA, for Amicus Curiae.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (No. 04-02608-CV-WSD-1); William S. Duffey, Jr., Judge.
Before EDMONDSON, Chief Judge, and TJOFLAT, BIRCH, DUBINA, BLACK, CARNES, BARKETT, HULL, MARCUS, WILSON, PRYOR and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
On September 10, 2007, we granted rehearing en banc of our decision in Community State Bank v. Strong, 485 F.3d 597 (11th Cir.2007), to consider whether a federal court may look through a petition to compel arbitration of a claim in order to determine whether the court has jurisdiction. See Community State Bank v. Strong, 508 F.3d 576 (11th Cir.2007). In the time since we granted rehearing en banc, the Supreme Court has granted certiorari in Discover Bank v. Vaden, 396 F.3d 366 (4th Cir.2005), to decide essentially the same question, and on March 9, 2009, issued its decision in Vaden. See Vaden v. Discover Bank, ___ U.S. ___, 129 S.Ct. 1262, 173 L.Ed.2d 206 (2009). The Supreme Court determined that a federal court may look through a petition to compel arbitration to determine whether it has jurisdiction over the petition. See id. at 1268.
In light of this development, we have concluded that this case no longer merits en banc review. See United States v. Drury, 396 F.3d 1143, 1144 (11th Cir.2005) (en banc) () (quoting Fed. R.App. Proc. 35(a); citing 11th Cir. R. 35-3).
Accordingly, we VACATE the order of September 10, 2007...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cmty. State Bank v. Strong
...in Vaden ). In light of Vaden, this Court vacated its en banc order and remanded the case back to the panel. Cmty. State Bank v. Strong, 565 F.3d 1305, 1306 (11th Cir.2009). We now revisit the same question we faced in Strong I, with the benefit of the Supreme Court's guidance in Vaden. Fol......
-
Eggelston v. Marshall Durbin Food Corp., CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:10-cv-02290-JEO
...and granting reh'g en banc, 508 F.3d 576 (11th Cir. 2007), vacating order granting reh'g en banc and remanding case to panel, 565 F.3d 1305 (11th Cir. 2009), substituted opinion, 651 F.3d 1241 (11th Cir. 2011) ("Strong II"). The Eleventh Circuit has held similarly as it relates to petitions......
-
Sea Byte v. Hudson Marine Management Services
... ... These tasks are completed with oversight from state and county officials known as "Trustees." ... The ... and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." Dresdner Bank AG v. M/V Olympia Voyager, 446 F.3d 1377, 1380 (11th Cir.2006) ... ...
-
Cobb v. Resurgent Capital Servs., LP
...vacated Strong but only to consider an unrelated issue en banc—which it ultimately never did. See 508 F.3d 576 (11th Cir. 2007); 565 F.3d 1305 (11th Cir. 2009). 2. (See Dkt. 12-2 at 42 ("You and we agree that either you or we may, without the other's consent, require that any controversy or......