Legal Opinion
Theodore Heinemann, I v. Daniel Satterberg
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 24, 2013No. 12-35404PublishedCited by 198 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CLIFTON, Circuit Judge:
This appeal presents the question of whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, in its current form, prohibits a district court from granting a motion for summary judgment by default based upon a local court rule when an opposing party fails to respond. We conclude that it does.
In this case, in addition to citing such a local rule, the district court considered the motion on the merits and concluded that it should be granted. We agree and affirm the judgment.
I. Background
Theodore Heinemann was a passenger aboard a United Airlines flight from Amsterdam to Seattle…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Imbler v. PachtmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- United States v. VonnSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Kalina v. FletcherSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Van Asdale v. International Game TechnologyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Ed Knox, an Individual v. Southwest Airlines, a Texas Corporation, and David Swafford Robert Hopper City of Phoenix, a MunicipalityCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by198 opinions
- Rukhsana Chaudhry v. City of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- Ronald Ross v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- Copart, Inc. v. Sparta Consulting, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2017
- Fed. Hous. Fin. Agency, Home Loan Mortg. Corp. v. LN Mgmt. LLCDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2019
- McElwain v. Boeing Co.District Court, W.D. Washington · 2017
193 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.