Background
Gregory Hartmann and six other named appellants, proceeding on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, sought rehearing in their appeal against four Pennsylvania magisterial district judges, Lancaster County, and the warden of the Lancaster County Prison. The appeal arose from District Court docket No. 5:22-cv-01588.
The appellants filed a petition for panel rehearing. The appellees separately petitioned for rehearing en banc.
The Court’s Holding
The Third Circuit granted the appellants’ petition for panel rehearing and directed the clerk to file an amended opinion contemporaneously with the rehearing order. The court stated that the revisions did not affect the disposition of the appeal, so the existing judgment would remain as filed.
The court denied the appellees’ petition for rehearing en banc. No judge who had concurred in the decision requested rehearing, and a majority of the circuit judges in regular active service did not vote in favor of rehearing.
Key Takeaways
- The panel granted the appellants’ request for rehearing and issued an amended opinion.
- The amendments did not change the appeal’s disposition or the previously filed judgment.
- The full court declined the appellees’ request for rehearing en banc.
Why It Matters
The order revises the Third Circuit’s reasoning or presentation through an amended opinion while leaving the substantive outcome intact. It also ends the appellees’ effort to obtain review by the en banc court, absent further proceedings outside the Third Circuit.