# Prisco v. United States, Department of Justice

> Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · July 1, 1988 · 851 F.2d 93

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8961671

## Case

- **Full name:** Anthony J. PRISCO Jr., Individually and Anthony J. Prisco, Jr. as parent and natural guardian of Lauren Prisco, A Minor v. UNITED STATES of America, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, former U.S. Attorney General William French Smith, in his capacity as Attorney General and individually, Attorney General Edwin Meese, in his capacity as Attorney General and individually, United States Marshal Service, Stanley Morris, in his capacity as United States Marshal Service Director and individually, Unknown Agents of the United States Marshal Service and Michael Morris
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
- **Decided:** July 1, 1988
- **Citations:** 851 F.2d 93; 1988 WL 67104
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing
- **Judges:** Becker, Cowen, Gibbons, Greenberg, Higginbotham, Hutchinson, Mann, Mans, Mansmann, Scirica, Seitz, Sloviter, Stapleton
- **Cited by:** 13 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Overruled on other grounds by Acierno v. Cloutier, 40 F.3d 597 (1994).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8961671

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- emphasizing that "piecemeal interlocutory review of discrete issues in a case which ... will be ongoing" begets "systematic harms"

## Opinion text

SUE PETITION FOR REHEARING
Present: GIBBONS, Chief Judge, SEITZ, HIGGINBOTHAM, SLOVITER, BECKER, STAPLETON, MANSMANN, GREENBERG, HUTCHINSON, SCIRICA, AND COWEN, Circuit Judges.
The petition for rehearing filed by appellant in the above entitled case having been submitted to the judges who participated in the decision of this court and to all the other available circuit judges of the circuit in regular active service, and no judge who concurred in the decision having asked for rehearing, and a majority of the circuit judges of the circuit in regular active service not having voted for rehearing by the court in banc, the petition for rehearing is denied. Judge Seitz would grant rehearing in banc because of the appealability issue. He realizes that the evolving state of the law with respect to the parameters of Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (1985), can only be finally settled by the Supreme Court. Nevertheless, he believes the particular issue here fully satisfies the criteria for rehearing in banc. Judges Becker, Sta-pleton, Greenberg and Hutchinson would also grant rehearing.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8961671. Public record. Not legal advice.