Legal Opinion

Alioto v. Hoiles

District Court, D. Colorado

Decided May 29, 2007No. 1:04-cr-00438PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

KANE, Senior District Judge.

Based on the parties’ briefing and new California case law, the following issues previously ruled on by Judge Figa are reconsidered.

1. Compliance with Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 6147

Hoiles has moved for reconsideration of Judge Figa’s denial of summary judgment on the issue of the fee agreement’s compliance with § 6147. Judge Figa denied both parties’ summary judgment motions and held that whether the agreement complied with California law would be decided by the jury. The parties had urged, however, that compliance with the statutory…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Huskinson & Brown, Limited Liability Partnership v. WolfCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  2. In the Matter of Pacific Far East Line, Inc., Debtor. Joseph M. Alioto v. Official Creditor CommitteeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
  3. Cole v. Doe 1 Thru 2 Officers of Emeryville Police DepartmentDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2005
  4. Fergus v. SongerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  5. Fletcher v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Alioto v. HoilesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2013
  2. Alioto v. HoilesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2013
  3. Missouri Veterans Commission v. James B. PeakeUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API