Janet Jackson, Delois Evans v. Motel 6 Multipurpose, Inc., Motel 6 G.P., Inc., Motel 6 Operating L.P., Ibl Limited, Inc., D/B/A Motel 6, Accor S.A. Mario Pettaccia, Brenda Hatcher, Tanya Charles, Chervon Screen, Jennifer Bethel, James Sterns, Pitrell Lambert-Brown, Karl Baldwin, Marcian Killsnight v. Motel 6 G.P., Inc., Motel 6 Operating L.P., D/B/A Motel 6

Citations: 167 F.3d 542; 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 35757Docket: 97-2360

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit; September 22, 1998; Federal Appellate Court

Combined Opinion AnalysisCombined Opinion SummaryCombined Opinion Original

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case at hand involves multiple plaintiffs, including Janet Jackson and Delois Evans, against several Motel 6 entities and individual defendants. It was presented before the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. The primary issue at this appellate level was a request for rehearing en banc, which the court denied on September 22, 1998, thereby affirming the decision of a lower court. Although the specific details of the underlying dispute are not provided, the involvement of corporate entities such as Motel 6 suggests potential issues of negligence or liability. The procedural history indicates that the case was initially ruled upon by a lower court, with the appellate court subsequently affirming that decision. The denial of a rehearing en banc underscores the appellate court's final stance, solidifying the previous rulings and effectively concluding the appellate process for the parties involved. This outcome leaves the lower court's decision as the standing legal resolution of the case.

Legal Issues Addressed

Affirmation of Lower Court Decisionsubscribe to see similar legal issues

Application: The appellate court upheld the decision made by the lower court, indicating agreement with the initial ruling.

Reasoning: The case had previously been decided in a lower court, with the appellate court affirming that decision.

Denial of Rehearing En Bancsubscribe to see similar legal issues

Application: The appellate court has chosen not to reconsider the case with the full bench of judges, affirming the previous decision.

Reasoning: The document pertains to the denial of rehearing en banc, which means the court has decided not to reconsider the case with the full bench of judges.