Mickwee v. Hsu

Ninth Circuit

Mickwee v. Hsu

753 F.2d 770

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 11, 1985

DocketNos. 84-2215, 84-2560

StatusPublished

Cited by13 cases

This text of 753 F.2d 770 (Mickwee v. Hsu) 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

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

Pincite

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]*771be 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

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]*771be awarded attorney’s fees and costs for the appeal upon submission of appropriate documentation.

Susan Basch and Jonathan David Basch, a Minor by His Mother and Next Friend Susan Basch and Rachel Elizabeth Basch, a Minor by Her Mother and Next Friend Susan Basch and Benjamin Ari Basch, a Minor by His Mother and Next Friend Susan Basch and Estate of Philip Basch, Susan Basch, Personal Representative v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Susan Basch and Jonathan David Basch, a Minor by His Mother and Next Friend Susan Basch and Rachel Elizabeth Basch, a Minor by Her Mother and Next Friend Susan Basch and Benjamin Ari Basch, a Minor by His Mother and Next Friend Susan Basch and Estate of Philip Basch, Susan Basch, Personal Representative v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, in Re Jerome J. Seidenman and Seidenman & Weiss, P.A.

777 F.2d 165 (Fourth Circuit, 1985)

Basch v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.

777 F.2d 165 (Fourth Circuit, 1985)

General William C. Westmoreland, Ambassador Richard Helms v. Cbs, Inc.

770 F.2d 1168 (D.C. Circuit, 1985)

Ronald Mickwee v. Stephen Hsu, Cal-Comp Electronics, Inc., and Mattaniah Eytan and Kaplan

753 F.2d 770 (Ninth Circuit, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

753 F.2d 770, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mickwee-v-hsu-ca9-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack