Mercury Refueling Inc., and Amy J. Cassedy, L. Burke Lewis, Lewis & Company, Lawyers v. Joseph v. Siler
This text of 942 F.2d 792 (Mercury Refueling Inc., and Amy J. Cassedy, L. Burke Lewis, Lewis & Company, Lawyers v. Joseph v. Siler) 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.
Opinion
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
MERCURY REFUELING INC., Plaintiff,
and
Amy J. Cassedy, L. Burke Lewis, Lewis & Company, Lawyers, Appellants,
v.
Joseph V. SILER, et al., Defendants/Appellees.
No. 90-55025.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 12, 1991.*
Decided Aug. 26, 1991.
Before CHAMBERS and WALLACE, Circuit Judges, and TANNER**, District Judge.
ORDER***
Lewis & Company, Lawyers, appeal the imposition of sanctions upon them by the district court. We affirm for the reasons stated by the district court in its Memorandum Order dated December 15, 1989.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); Ninth Circuit Rule 34-4
The Honorable Jack E. Tanner, Senior United States District Judge for the Western District of Washington, sitting by designation
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
942 F.2d 792, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 26228, 1991 WL 164262, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mercury-refueling-inc-and-amy-j-cassedy-l-burke-le-ca9-1991.