Sam Francis Foundation v. Christies, Inc.

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Sam Francis Foundation v. Christies, Inc.. Read the opinion of the Court — 784 F.3d 1320
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided October 30, 2014·No. 12-56067·Published

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 30 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

SAM FRANCIS FOUNDATION; No. 12-56067 ESTATE OF ROBERT GRAHAM; CHUCK CLOSE; LADDIE JOHN D.C. No. 2:11-cv-08605-MWF- DILL, FFM

Plaintiffs - Appellants, ORDER v.

CHRISTIE’S, INC., a New York corporation,

Defendant - Appellee.

SAM FRANCIS FOUNDATION; No. 12-56068 ESTATE OF ROBERT GRAHAM; CHUCK CLOSE; LADDIE JOHN D.C. No. 2:11-cv-08622-MWF- DILL, PLA

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

v.

EBAY, INC., a Delaware corporation,

Defendant - Appellee. Page 2

ESTATE OF ROBERT GRAHAM; No. 12-56077 CHUCK CLOSE; LADDIE JOHN DILL, individually and on behalf of all D.C. No. 2:11-cv-08604-MWF- others similarly situated, FFM

SOTHEBY’S, INC., a New York corporation,

THOMAS, Circuit Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that

this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a)

and Circuit Rule 35-3.

Judges Wardlaw and Nguyen did not participate in the deliberations or vote

in this case.

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

Sam Francis Foundation v. Christies, Inc., (9th Cir. 2014).

Sam Francis Foundation v. Christies, Inc. (Sam Francis Foundation v. Christies, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.