David L. Masinter v. Marlin Drilling Company, Inc.
David L. MASINTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MARLIN DRILLING COMPANY, INC., Defendant-Appellee
Opinion
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING Before CLARK, Chief Judge, RONEY 1
, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
DUHÉ, Circuit Judge:
Appellant Masinter has filed a petition for rehearing in Masinter v. Tenneco Oil Company, 929 F.2d 191 (5th Cir.1991)
(Masinter II)
and a motion to recall and reform the mandate entered in Masinter v. Tenneco Oil Company, 867 F.2d 892 (5th Cir.1989)
(Masinter I).
The panel in Ma-sinter I recalled and reformed its mandate and instructed the district court to award Masinter interest on his award of future lost wages from the date of the first judgment.
In Masinter II this Court ruled that Ma-sinter could only recover interest on his award of future lost wages from the date of a second, modified judgment pursuant to the original mandate in Masinter I.
Because of the reformation of that mandate we now grant Masinter’s petition for rehearing in Masinter II.
We remand to the district court the issue relating to Masinter's interest award on future lost wages for further proceedings consistent with the reformed mandate in Masinter I.
We confirm and reinstate our prior opinion, 929 F.2d 191 , in all respects not inconsistent herewith.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.