“[Chase] held that the district courts are free to develop their own standard of decisional uniformity in deciding whether to grant en banc hearings and rehearings. It is logical to assume that the supreme court holds the same view about the proper interpretation and application of the term ‘exceptional importance.’ This part of the rule was added after the decision in Chase, but the general point is the same. The supreme court recognized that en banc review is a matter for the district courts.”
How later courts described this case
- “[Chase] held that the district courts are free to develop their own standard of decisional uniformity in deciding whether to grant en banc hearings and rehearings. It is logical to assume that the supreme court holds the same view about the proper interpretation and application of the term ‘exceptional importance.’ This part of the rule was added after the decision in Chase, but the general point is the same. The supreme court recognized that en banc review is a matter for the district courts.”
- on motion for certification
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
WOLF, J.,
Concurring in part and Dissenting in part.
I would grant certification on the en banc determination; in all other respects I agree with the majority to deny certification.