Ganezer v. Directby

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJune 25, 2009
Docket09-55818
StatusPublished

This text of Ganezer v. Directby (Ganezer v. Directby) 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
Ganezer v. Directby, (9th Cir. 2009).

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PHIL GANEZER and LYNETTE SOHL,  No. 09-55818 on their own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated; et D.C. No. al., 2:08-cv-08666- Plaintiffs-Appellees,  GAF-RC Central District of v. California, DIRECTBUY, INC., an Indiana Los Angeles Corporation, ORDER Defendant-Appellant.  Filed June 25, 2009

Before: Kim McLane Wardlaw, Johnnie B. Rawlinson, and N. Randy Smith, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

The judgment of the district court is vacated. This matter is remanded to the district court with instructions to stay pro- ceedings pending a decision by the United States Supreme Court in Hertz Corp. v. Friend, No. 08-16963, 2008 WL 4750198 (9th Cir. Oct. 30, 2008), cert. granted, 2009 WL 559348 (U.S. June 8, 2009) (No. 08-1107). The appeal is removed from the July 10, 2009, Pasadena calendar.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8191 PRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON REUTERS/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO

The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted © 2009 Thomson Reuters/West.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Ganezer v. Directby, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ganezer-v-directby-ca9-2009.