Jinro America Inc. v. Secure Investments, Inc.

272 F.3d 1289, 2001 Daily Journal DAR 12642, 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10145, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 25988, 2000 WL 33651056

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Jinro America Inc. v. Secure Investments, Inc.. Read the opinion of the Court — 266 F.3d 993 →

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided December 5, 2001·No. No. 99-16133·Published

Opinion

ORDER AMENDING OPINION AND DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING

The opinion filed September 14, 2001 [266 F.3d 993], is amended as follows:

At slip op. 13284, line 14 [266 F.3d at 1010], insert footnote number 9 after “... opinion.”

9 Because the district court’s grant of summary judgment on Jinro’s fraud claim expressly assumed that Jinro’s “claims all rest on proof that the parties intended to be bound by the JPA,” that judgment is reversed as well.

With this amendment, Appellant’s petition for rehearing is DENIED.

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

ORDER AMENDING OPINION AND DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING

The opinion filed September 14, 2001 [266 F.3d 993], is amended as follows:

At slip op. 13284, line 14 [266 F.3d at 1010], insert footnote number 9 after “... opinion.”

9 Because the district court’s grant of summary judgment on Jinro’s fraud claim expressly assumed that Jinro’s “claims all rest on proof that the parties intended to be bound by the JPA,” that judgment is reversed as well.

With this amendment, Appellant’s petition for rehearing is DENIED.

Jinro America Inc. v. Secure Investments, Inc., 272 F.3d 1289, 2001 Daily Journal DAR 12642, 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10145, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 25988, 2000 WL 33651056 (9th Cir. 2001).

Pincite

272 F.3d 1289 (Jinro America Inc. v. Secure Investments, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.