From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Forbes v. Napolitano

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Dec 29, 2000
260 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. 2000)

Opinion

No. 99-17372.

August 9, 2001. Argued and Submitted October 3, 2000.

Filed December 29, 2000. Order Amending Opinion Filed April 11, 2001. Second Amendment Filed August 9, 2001.

Bebe J. Anderson, The Center for Reproductive Law Policy, New York, N.Y. and Michael Owen Miller, Miller Smith LLP, Tucson, Arizona, for the plaintiffs-appellees.

Charles R. Pyle, Assistant Attorney General, Tucson, Arizona, for the defendants-appellants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona William D. Browning, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-96-00288-WDB.

Before: SNEED, SCHROEDER, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.


The opinion filed December 29, 2000 is amended as follows: at page 4510 of the slip opinion, lines 5-6 from the bottom, after the cite to City of Chicago v. Morales, add the parenthetical "(plurality)", so that it reads: City of Chicago v. Morales, 527 U.S. 41, 52, 119 S.Ct. 1849, 144 L.Ed.2d 67 (1999) (plurality).

The mandate may now issue.


Summaries of

Forbes v. Napolitano

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Dec 29, 2000
260 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. 2000)
Case details for

Forbes v. Napolitano

Case Details

Full title:Fred FORBES; Margaret Bohn; John L. Summers; Ann S. Anderson, Stuart R…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Dec 29, 2000

Citations

260 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. 2000)

Citing Cases

Jeter v. Mayo Clinic Arizona

Forbes v. Woods, 71 F.Supp.2d 1015, 1020 (D.Ariz. 1999), aff'd sub nom. Forbes v. Napolitano, 236 F.3d 1009…

Hoeg v. Newsom

Because AB 2098 implicates plaintiff Khatibi's First Amendment right to receive information, she has…