Legal Opinion
Goldberg v. Pacific Indemnity Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 6, 2010No. 09-16243PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
TRAGER, District Judge:
Defendants Pacific Indemnity Co. and Federal Insurance Co. (collectively “defendants”) appeal the district court’s denial of their request for expert witness fees and double costs pursuant to Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 68 (“Arizona Rule 68”). The district court found that Arizona Rule 68 did not apply because it conflicts with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 (“Federal Rule 68”), under which defendants are not entitled to recover costs because judgment was entered in their favor. This court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. For the following…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Hanna v. PlumerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Gasperini v. Center for Humanities, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Walker v. Armco Steel Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A. v. Allstate Insurance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2010
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Umg Recordings, Inc. v. Shelter Capital Partners LlcCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Estate of Prasad ex rel. Prasad v. County of SutterDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2013
- Varsam v. Laboratory Corp. of AmericaDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2015
- Simon Cheffins v. Michael StewartCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Stafford v. BurnsCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2017
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.