Judge Explains Circuit Reluctance for En Banc Review

, New York Law Journal

   | 1 Comments

The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has decided, by a close vote, not to rehear a decision throwing out a Hobbs Act robbery conviction in a case that prompted Judge Jose Cabranes to explain why the Second Circuit holds the fewest en banc rehearings of the nation's circuits.

This article has been archived, and is no longer available on this website.

View this content exclusively through LexisNexis® Here

Not a LexisNexis® Subscriber?

Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via lexis.com® and Nexis®. This includes content from The National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • Ravi Batra

    The good of the many appeals is better served by Chief Judge Learned hand‘s view, then by having an en banc hearing for a particular appeal that other judges might disagree with a 3-judge panel result. While efficiency and collegiality are certainly enhanced by Chief Judge Learned hand‘s view, the question remains: is a particular case unworthy of en banc-reset, when the Supreme Court doesn‘t hear appeals as of right?

    The right answer, I submit, belongs to collective wisdom than any particular lawyer‘s or appellant‘s view.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202656680236

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.