DHX, Inc. v. Allianz AGF MAT, Ltd.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1ConcurrenceBeezer, Circuit Judge
The parties arrived at a complete financial settlement but agreed to continue to litigate. Without informing us, the parties created a facade: Allianz entered into a complete financial settlement with DHX, but Allianz also paid DHX attorney’s fees so that DHX could continue to litigate the case and play the part of an aggrieved party, even though DHX no longer had any interest in the matter.
The parties have settled their entire underlying dispute, depriving us of a live case or controversy which permits adjudication. I write separately to emphasize the fundamental principle that settlements…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Baker v. CarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Steffel v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Sanders v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Arizonans for Official English v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- County of Los Angeles v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.