Legal Opinion
Truesdell v. Southern California Permanente Medical Group
District Court, C.D. California
Decided June 20, 2001No. CV 01-02337 ABC (BQRX)PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. PRO. 11 & 28 U.S.C. § 1927
COLLINS, District Judge.
On April 18, 2001, the Court signed an Order granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss. In her Complaint, Plaintiff challenged the result (and the procedures) of an arbitration proceeding, performed pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement (“CBA”), concerning Plaintiffs grievance of her termination. The arbitrator reinstated Plaintiffs employment, but did not award her any back pay. This Court found that Plaintiffs Complaint failed to state a claim for relief. Defendant…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Pavelic & LeFlore v. Marvel Entertainment Group, Div. of Cadence Industries Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Richard L. Zaldivar v. City of Los Angeles, and Margaret Salazar, Intervenors-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- In Re Matter of Stephen Yagman, Jerry Brown and Gerry Fleischer v. Michael Baden and Sidney WeinbergCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Stephen Michael Ridder v. City of Springfield, Clark CountyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Dyan A. Truesdell v. Southern California Permanente Medical Group, a Partnership and the Hospital and Service Employees International Union, Local 399Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Truesdell v. SOUTHERN CAL. PERM. MED. GROUPDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2001