Legal Opinion
Foundation Auto Holdings, LLC v. Weber Motors, Fresno, Inc.
District Court, E.D. California
Decided December 8, 2021No. 1:21-cv-00970Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 FOUNDATION AUTO HOLDINGS, LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-00970-NONE-EPG 10 Plaintiff, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT MOTION TO INTERVENE 11 v. (ECF No. 16) 12 WEBER MOTORS, FRESNO, INC., et al., OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, DUE WITHIN 13 Defendants. FOURTEEN DAYS 14 15 Before the Court is Proposed Plaintiff-in-Intervention Templeton Marsh, Ltd.’s motion to 16 intervene. (ECF No. 16). For the reasons described below, the undersigned recommends that the 17 motion to intervene be granted. 18 I. BACKGROUND1 19 Plaintiff Foundation…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Lavonne BAXTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Louis SULLIVAN, M.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Beckman Industries, Inc. Smithkline Beckman, and Stauffer Chemical Company, Intervenors-Appellees v. International Insurance Company, Beckman Industries, Inc. Smithkline Beckman, and Monsanto Company Reichhold Limited Fmc Corporation Bridgestone/firestone, Intervenors-Appellees v. International Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- United States v. Alisal Water Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Donnelly v. GlickmanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Wilderness Society v. United States Forest ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.