Legal Opinion

Paciulan v. George

District Court, N.D. California

Decided March 3, 1999No. C 98-1201 SIPublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER:

ILLSTON, District Judge.(1)GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND;(2) DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT;

AND(3) GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SANCTIONS BY IMPOSING A PREFILING REQUIREMENT

On July 24 and September 4, 1998, the Court heard argument on defendants’ motions to dismiss and for sanctions, and plaintiffs’ counter motion for summary judgment. 1 Having carefully considered the arguments of counsel and the submitted papers, the Court hereby GRANTS defendants’ motions to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint without leave to amend; DENIES plaintiffs’…

2Cases cited46 opinions

  1. Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  3. Graham v. ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  5. Federal Communications Commission v. Beach Communications, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993

41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Paciulan v. GeorgeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
  2. Attorney Grievance Commission v. JosephCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2011
  3. National Ass'n for the Advancement of Multijurisdiction Practice v. BerchCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
  4. National Ass'n for the Advancement of Multijurisdiction Practice v. SimandleCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2016
  5. National Ass'n for the Advancement of Multijurisdiction Practice v. BerchDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2013

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API