Samson v. NAMA HOLDINGS, LLC
This text of 629 F.3d 980 (Samson v. NAMA HOLDINGS, LLC) 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
Shawn SAMSON; Jack Kashani, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
NAMA HOLDINGS, LLC, Defendant-Appellee.
Shawn Samson; Jack Kashani, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
Nama Holdings, LLC, Defendant-Appellee.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Roger J. Magnuson, Kent J. Schmidt, Dorsey & Whitney LLP, Irvine, CA; Kathleen M. Sullivan, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges LLP, New York, NY; Richard A. Schirtzer, Susan R. Estrich, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Shawn Samson and Jack Kashani.
Howard J. Rubinroit, Ronald C. Cohen, James M. Harris, Sidley Austin LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for NAMA Holdings, LLC.
Before: STEPHEN S. TROTT and KIM McLANE WARDLAW, Circuit Judges, and RUDI M. BREWSTER, Senior District Judge.[**]
ORDER
As to Appeal No. 09-55835, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court in its May 20, 2009 Order Denying Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Arbitration. Appeal No. 09-56394, challenging the district court's award of prevailing party attorneys' fees to Defendant, is therefore moot.
APPEAL NO. 09-55835: AFFIRMED.
APPEAL NO. 09-56394: MOOT.
NOTES
[*] The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
[**] The Honorable Rudi M. Brewster, Senior United States District Judge for the Southern District of California, sitting by designation.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
629 F.3d 980, 2010 WL 5184248, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/samson-v-nama-holdings-llc-ca9-2010.