William Howe v. City of Akron
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
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
- Midland Asphalt Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Van Cauwenberghe v. BiardSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Cunningham v. Hamilton CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Balintulo v. Daimler AGCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2013
- Howe v. City of AkronDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2011
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- William Howe v. City of AkronCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2015
- William Howe v. City of AkronCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017
- William Howe v. City of AkronCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017