Mickwee v. Hsu

753 F.2d 770
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided February 11, 1985·No. Nos. 84-2215, 84-2560·Published·Cited by 13 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This opinion concerns awards of attorney’s fees for proceedings in this court in cases where a party appeals a district court order of sanctions for failure to comply with discovery rules.

When the trial court has imposed sanctions for failure to comply with discovery and the order is appealed, as a general rule attorney’s fees should be awarded where the discovery order is upheld. Failure to award attorney’s fees in such instances would substantially diminish the value of the award made in the trial court and thus frustrate the purpose of Fed.R.Civ.P. 37. See Tamari v. Bache & Co. (Lebanon) S.A.L., 729 F.2d 469, 475 (7th Cir.1984).

This appeal from the imposition of discovery sanctions must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Kordich v. Marine Clerks Association, 715 F.2d 1392, 1393 (9th Cir.1983) (per curiam). Mickwee will [771] be awarded attorney’s fees and costs for the appeal upon submission of appropriate documentation.

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

Mickwee v. Hsu, 753 F.2d 770 (9th Cir. 1985).

753 F.2d 770 (Mickwee v. Hsu) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bhan v. NME Hospitals, Inc.
929 F.2d 1404 (Ninth Circuit, 1991)
Rhinehart v. KIRO, Inc.
723 P.2d 22 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1986)
North American Watch Corp. v. Princess Ermine Jewels
786 F.2d 1447 (Ninth Circuit, 1986)
Basch v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.
777 F.2d 165 (Fourth Circuit, 1985)