Legal Opinion

William Howe v. City of Akron

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided February 4, 2014No. 12-4262UnpublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CLAY, Circuit Judge.

Plaintiffs appeal an order sanctioning them, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927, for abuse of the discovery process. An earlier trial resulted in a verdict for Plaintiffs, who are a group of firefighters who alleged discrimination in the promotions process by the City of Akron. The district court ordered a new trial on the issue of damages only. After extensive discovery and motions practice, the district court ordered Plaintiffs to pay Defendant $97,056.18 in fees for abuse of the discovery process, on the basis of Plaintiffs’ shifting damages theories. Plaintiffs appeal the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Midland Asphalt Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. Van Cauwenberghe v. BiardSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  3. Cunningham v. Hamilton CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  4. Balintulo v. Daimler AGCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2013
  5. Howe v. City of AkronDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2011

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. William Howe v. City of AkronCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2015
  2. William Howe v. City of AkronCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017
  3. William Howe v. City of AkronCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API