Dague Ex Rel. Estate of Dague v. Dumesic

402 F. App'x 218
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedOctober 29, 2010
Docket09-16427
StatusUnpublished

This text of 402 F. App'x 218 (Dague Ex Rel. Estate of Dague v. Dumesic) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dague Ex Rel. Estate of Dague v. Dumesic, 402 F. App'x 218 (9th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

*219 MEMORANDUM **

Appellant Joe Dague appeals the District Court’s denial of reconsideration of the magistrate’s order awarding attorney’s fees to appellees. The standard of review is abuse of discretion. See United States v. Sumitomo Marine & Fire Ins. Co., 617 F.2d 1365, 1369 (9th Cir.1980).

Based on the record, the magistrate did not abuse his discretion by holding that the correspondence via mail between the parties did not satisfy the “meet and confer” requirement of Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a) and D. Nev. R. 26-7(b). See Shuffle Master, Inc. v. Progressive Games, Inc., 170 F.R.D. 166, 171 (D.Nev.1996) Upon denying the motion to compel, it was within the magistrate’s discretion to award attorney fees to appellees under Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a)(5)(B). Thus, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the reconsideration of the magistrate’s order. The appellee’s request for attorney’s fees on the appeal is denied because the appeal is not frivolous.

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
402 F. App'x 218, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dague-ex-rel-estate-of-dague-v-dumesic-ca9-2010.