Legal Opinion
Rynn v. Jennings
District Court, D. Arizona
Decided March 10, 2025No. 4:24-cv-00594Unknown
1Opinion
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Richard Rynn, et al., No. CV-24-00594-TUC-JGZ 10 Plaintiffs, ORDER 11 v. 12 Craig Jennings, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 On February 19, 2025, the Court granted all pending motions to dismiss in this case 16 and denied Plaintiffs leave to amend their First Amended Complaint. (Doc. 174 at 16–18.) 17 The Court ordered Plaintiffs to “show cause: (1) why they should not be sanctioned 18 pursuant to the Court’s inherent powers for filing this lawsuit in bad faith; and (2) why they 19 have not violated Rule 11(b)…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- De Long v. HennesseyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Molski v. Evergreen Dynasty Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- In Re: Keegan Management Co., Securities Litigation. Michael Moore, and Lieff, Cabraser & Heimann Elizabeth J. Cabraser v. Keegan Management Company, a Delaware Corporation, Michael Moore, and Richard L. Jaeger Feldman, Waldman & Kline v. Keegan Management Company, a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- America Unites for Kids v. Sylvia RousseauCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2021
- Barber v. MillerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.