Williams v. Taylor Seidenbach, Inc., No. 18-31159
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit) |
| Citation | 941 F.3d 1183 (Mem) |
| Decision Date | 11 November 2019 |
| Parties | Tarsia WILLIAMS; Breck Williams, Plaintiffs - Appellants v. TAYLOR SEIDENBACH, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee Tarsia Williams; Breck Williams, Plaintiffs - Appellants v. McCarty Corporation, Defendant - Appellee |
| Docket Number | No. 18-31159,Consolidated for argument with 18-31161 |
941 F.3d 1183 (Mem)
Tarsia WILLIAMS; Breck Williams, Plaintiffs - Appellants
v.
TAYLOR SEIDENBACH, INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee
Tarsia Williams; Breck Williams, Plaintiffs - Appellants
v.
McCarty Corporation, Defendant - Appellee
No. 18-31159
Consolidated for argument with 18-31161
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
FILED November 11, 2019
Caleb H. Didriksen, III, Esq., Attorney, Erin Bruce Saucier, Didriksen, Saucier & Woods, P.L.C., New Orleans, LA, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.
Christopher Kelly Lightfoot, Esq., Edward Lassus, Jr., Esq., Hailey, McNamara, Hall, Larmann & Papale, L.L.P., Metairie, LA, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before OWEN, Chief Judge, JONES, SMITH, STEWART, DENNIS, ELROD, SOUTHWICK, HAYNES, GRAVES, HIGGINSON, COSTA, WILLETT, HO, DUNCAN, ENGELHARDT, and OLDHAM, Circuit Judges.
BY THE COURT:
A member of the court having requested a poll on the petition for rehearing en banc, and a majority of the circuit judges in regular active service and not disqualified having voted in favor,
IT IS ORDERED that this cause shall be reheard by the court en banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. The Clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Williams v. Seidenbach, No. 18-31159
...a final decision. Williams v. Taylor Seidenbach, Inc. (Williams II) , 935 F.3d 358, 360 (5th Cir. 2019), vacated on rehearing en banc , 941 F.3d 1183 (5th Cir. 2019).We subsequently granted rehearing en banc. We now conclude that Rule 54(b) authorized the district court to enter partial fin......
-
Williams v. Taylor Seidenbach, Inc., No. 18-31159
...935 F.3d 358, 360 (5th Cir. 2019) (holding Rule 54(b) judgment did not cure lack of appellate jurisdiction), vacated on en banc reh'g, 941 F.3d 1183 (5th Cir. 2019). Our en banc court has since ruled, however, that a subsequent Rule 54(b) judgment did create an appealable final judgment as ......
-
Williams v. Seidenbach, No. 18-31159
...a final decision. Williams v. Taylor Seidenbach, Inc. (Williams II) , 935 F.3d 358, 360 (5th Cir. 2019), vacated on rehearing en banc , 941 F.3d 1183 (5th Cir. 2019).We subsequently granted rehearing en banc. We now conclude that Rule 54(b) authorized the district court to enter partial fin......
-
Williams v. Taylor Seidenbach, Inc., No. 18-31159
...935 F.3d 358, 360 (5th Cir. 2019) (holding Rule 54(b) judgment did not cure lack of appellate jurisdiction), vacated on en banc reh'g, 941 F.3d 1183 (5th Cir. 2019). Our en banc court has since ruled, however, that a subsequent Rule 54(b) judgment did create an appealable final judgment as ......