Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
General
Robert W. SIMMONS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. W. M. JONES and Ernest Walker et al., Jury Commissioners for Long County, Georgia, Defendants-Appellants
519 F.2d 52·United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·1975
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Robert W. SIMMONS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. W. M. JONES and Ernest Walker et al., Jury Commissioners for Long County, Georgia, Defendants-Appellants.
No. 71-1092.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Sept. 15, 1975.
R. L. Dawson, Richard D. Phillips, Lu-dowici, Ga., for defendants-appellants.
Frank W. Seiler, Walter C. Hartridge, Charles H. Wessels, Savannah, Ga., for plaintiff-appellee.
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC
Before GODBOLD; SIMPSON and CLARK, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM:]
PER CURIAM:
The panel opinion, 5 Cir. 1973, 478 F.2d 321, is modified in the following respects:
(a) The language appearing in the last sentence of the first complete paragraph on page 330 of 478 F.2d (slip opinion, page 20, next to last line): “Without a conclusive showing — ” is changed to read “Without a clear showing”.
(b) The following language is added at the end of Note 9 appearing on page 330 of 478 F.2d (slip opinion page 20): “Upon a showing of inability to obtain relief through state judicial processes, nothing said herein should be construed to deny an aggrieved state suitor access to the federal courts.”
The panel opinion is adhered to in all other respects.
The Petition for Rehearing is denied and no member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc, (Rule 35, Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 12) the Petition for Rehearing En Banc is denied.