In the Matter of Patrick C. Dinkins, Debtor. Pac. E. Corp. v. Patrick C. Dinkins, 614 F.2d 1083 (5th Cir. 1980). · Go Syfert
Search
In the Matter of Patrick C. Dinkins, Debtor. Pac. E. Corp. v. Patrick C. Dinkins, 614 F.2d 1083 (5th Cir. 1980). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Kraszewski v. State Farm General Insurance (ca9, 1990-08-31)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers.
discussed Cited "see" Kraszewski v. State Farm General Insurance
9th Cir. · 1990 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord, Gonzalez v. Markle Manufacturing Co., 487 F.Supp. 1088, 1092 (W.D.Tex.) (plaintiff entitled to back pay until date of judgment not date of magistrate’s report), aff'd, 614 F.2d 1083 (5th Cir.1980); Patterson v. American Tobacco Co., 535 F.2d 257, 269 (4th Cir.) (back pay extends until the date of judgment), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 920 , 97 S.Ct. 315 , 50 L.Ed.2d 286 (1976); Hartman v. Wick, 678 F.Supp. 312, 336 (D.D.C.1988) (“In keeping with the remedial, make-whole purpose of back pay, the cut-off date of each back pay award will be the day on which the award is approved for the pa…
discussed Cited "see" Kraszewski v. State Farm General Insurance Company
9th Cir. · 1990 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord, Gonzalez v. Markle Manufacturing Co., 487 F.Supp. 1088, 1092 (W.D.Tex.) (plaintiff entitled to back pay until date of judgment not date of magistrate's report), aff'd, 614 F.2d 1083 (5th Cir.1980); Patterson v. American Tobacco Co., 535 F.2d 257, 269 (4th Cir.) (back pay extends until the date of judgment), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 920 , 97 S.Ct. 315 , 50 L.Ed.2d 286 (1976); Hartman v. Wick, 678 F.Supp. 312, 336 (D.D.C.1988) ("In keeping with the remedial, make-whole purpose of back pay, the cut-off date of each back pay award will be the day on which the award is approved for the partic…
In the Matter of Patrick C. DINKINS, Debtor; PACIFIC EASTERN CORPORATION, Appellant,
v.
Patrick C. DINKINS, Appellee
78-1151.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Mar 31, 1980.
614 F.2d 1083
Ames Davis, Nashville, Tenn., for appellant., William Vance, David G. Bisbee, Atlanta, Ga., for appellee.
Kravitch, Per Curiam, Tuttle, Vance.
Published

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

(Opinion January 25, 1980, 5 Cir. 1980, 610 F.2d 367).

Before TUTTLE, VANCE and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

The petition for rehearing is overruled. However, in order to clarify somewhat our discussion of the type of situation in which summary jurisdiction exists we revise the former opinion which is withdrawn and the following is substituted in lieu thereof.