Legal Opinion
Terry O'connor, as Successor in Interest to Capital Development Company, a California Corporation v. Gary L. Colvin
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided November 1, 1995No. 94-15890, 94-16299PublishedCited by 66 opinions
1Per curiam
We consider whether the district court had jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement that resolved a federal case. We conclude that it did not and vacate. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
I. BACKGROUND
In 1991, a dispute arose among Colvin, O’Connor and others about the ownership of certain computer programs. O’Connor sued Colvin and other defendants in state court, and the case was removed to federal district court based on the exclusive federal jurisdiction over copyrights, 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a).
In 1993, after court-supervised settlement negotiations, the parties entered into a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Angela K. Hagestad v. Roger C. Tragesser v. Oregon State Bar, Intervenor-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- Michael J. Topolos v. Jeffrey Caldewey, an Individual Dba Vintage Image, Robert Titus, Richard Paul Hinkle, an Individual and Does I Through MCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
3Cited by66 opinions
- Joshua Kelly v. Timothy WenglerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Alvarado v. Table Mountain RancheriaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- K.C. Ex Rel. Erica C. v. TorlaksonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- In Re Valdez Fisheries Development Association, Inc., Debtor. Sea Hawk Seafoods, Inc. v. State of AlaskaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Thompson v. City of Atlantic CitySupreme Court of New Jersey · 2007
61 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.