In Manning v. Caldwell, the Fourth Circuit in an opinion by Judges Motz and Keenan, joined by Chief Judge Gregory and Judges King, Wynn, Floyd, Thacker, and Harris, reversed the dismissal for failure to state a claim in a constitutional challenge based on vagueness to the provisions of Va. Code 4.1-333, which allows a Virginia court to enter an order prohibiting the sale of alcoholic beverages to a person who has been adjudged to be a habitual drunkard.
Judge Keenan also wrote a separate opinion, joined by Judge Motz and Judge Thacker, responding to the dissent.
Judge Wilkinson wrote a dissenting opinion, joined by Judges Niemeyer, Agee, Richardson, Quattlebaum, and Senior Judge Duncan.
Judge Wilkinson wrote a separate little opinion responding to Judge Keenan, his fellow Virginian.
Judge Diaz wrote a separate dissenting opinion, saying that the vagueness claim on the merits was no good.
The whole thing is 83 pages, some of it more accessible and some of it less accessible.