Legal Opinion
Blumberg v. Gates
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided November 2, 2005No. 04-55034PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM**
Appellant Stephen Yagman appeals the district court’s imposition of sanctions against him pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 and 28 U.S.C. section 1927, and the denial of his sanctions motion against Appellees.
*653The imposition of sanctions under either Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 or 28 U.S.C. § 1927 is reviewed for abuse of discretion. See Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 405, 110 S.Ct. 2447, 110 L.Ed.2d 359 (1990); Retail Flooring Dealers of Am., Inc. v. Beaulieu of Am., LLC, 339 F.3d 1146, 1150 (9th Cir.2003); Gomez v. Vernon, 255 F.3d 1118, 1135…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Richard L. Zaldivar v. City of Los Angeles, and Margaret Salazar, Intervenors-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Gomez v. VernonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- PRIMUS AUTOMOTIVE FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rudolph A. BATARSE, Defendant, Jan C. Nielsen, AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
- Barber v. MillerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Countryman Nevada, LLC v. Doe-73.164.181.226District Court, D. Oregon · 2016
- Martinez v. City of West SacramentoDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021
- Roe v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company NADistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2024