Legal Opinion
Graham-Sult v. Clainos
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 27, 2013No. Nos. 11-16779, 12-15892PublishedCited by 50 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judge:
ORDER
The Opinion filed December 27, 2013, appearing at 738 F.3d 1131, is amended as follows:
1. At slip op. 45 [738 F.3d at 1157-58], delete “, and Clainos and the Greene Defendants challenge the amounts awarded”
2. At slip op. 45 [738 F.3d at 1157-58], delete “Both Clainos and the Greene Defendants appealed their reduced fee awards.”
With these amendments, the panel has voted unanimously to deny the petition for panel rehearing. The petition for rehearing is DENIED.
No further petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc may be filed in response to the amended opinion.
OP…
2Cases cited58 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USACourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- Equilon Enterprises v. Consumer Cause, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2002
- Flatley v. MauroCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by50 opinions
- Patrick Maloney v. T3media, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- Safari Club Int'l v. Lawrence RudolphCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- Liberty Synergistics, Inc. v. Microflo Ltd.District Court, E.D. New York · 2014
- Larson v. Midland Hospital Supply, Inc.North Dakota Supreme Court · 2016
- Faulks v. Wells Fargo & Co.District Court, N.D. California · 2017
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.