◆ SpookStack

Faden! Artpelfees’ “PeTiTion (er Rehearing On The | FsFve'. of SaneTions - eto " TRBIE, OF CONTENTS - ; Pabie of Cases ot ceccccccceveccecccceeesscseceescrscsccnneeeaes Es aii Federal Appeliees' Petition For Rehearing ‘a the Issues of Sanctions ccccccvewesocesosecocssoococoocecs Statement of Facts CTS OSS 6 UWS SOW 6 OWE 00:00 00:0 0 00S S45 ESTEDOSO CCC CD , 2° Argument Re *. a ey e Sorclusion ou eda sees esces bees uns cuneuclesmenmrennne dit) FEEEPECES , 8U SCA. -- 7th Circui: Reveived in Clerk’s Offic: Geses en , A ryoma & F. STRUE Berry v. Midtown Service Corp., 104 F.2d 107 (24 Cir. 1939) sees _ CLERK Beshear v. Weingapfel, 474 F.2d 127 (7th Cir. 1973) ...2.------ 8 - a= - Boylan. v. Detrio, 187 F.2d 375 (Sth Cir. 1951) .........-- Sosa Ee > Switt v. Corporecion Pervena DeVarores, 506 F.2d 927, 932 (5th Cir. 1975) eee eee eee races ese eeeeeesesesrsserseesesesseesresees Burkett v. Chandler, 505 F.2d 217 (10th Cir. 1974) .....ece000. 7 : Gompbell v. Eastland, 307 F.2d 478 (Sth Cir. 1962) ....-eeeee0e 7 SO GREE © Pe 0 OARS eS DotA SES Sew 6 OG S08 Ses SO ae SENSE Oe: No 8! Campbell v. Johnson, 101 F.Supp. 705 (1951) ..-sessseseeeseeees Diaz v. Southern Drilling Corp., 427 F.24 1118, 1126 (5th _ Chix. 1970) ‘cert. denied 400 U.S. 878 -++seeeseeeeeereeeners q po "Hawkins v. United States, 190 F.2a 782 (4th Cir. 1951) ...0..-. 8. i _ Bunter v. International ——s 56 F-R.D. 617 (1972) seeeeeeee 2 i “ga ve Brow, 454 F.2d 999 (D.C. Cir. 1971) cceeseeeseeseeeeeee 7 ; 7 i i, In ve Sylvester, et al., 41 F.2d 231 (2d Cir. 1930) ....-+eeee - Jewel Tea Co. v. Kraus, 204 F.2d 549 (7th Cir. eal Swmesucme: 8 * = « ape i - _ Kozlowski v. Sears Roebuck, 71 F.R-D. 594 1976) «0. nocroosnee, 2 44 -1$ 03° | SEARCHED, « | i Margoles v. Johns, 587 F.2d 885 (7th Cir. 1978) ..-+-++esssdsemarizep Poe nop io JUN 8 i979