Securities & Exchange Commission v. Metropolis Holdings
This text of 182 F. App'x 714 (Securities & Exchange Commission v. Metropolis Holdings) 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
MEMORANDUM
Because the district court properly determined that the retainer lacked the defining characteristics of a true retainer, see SEC v. Interlink Data Network of Los Angeles, Inc., 77 F.3d 1201, 1205 (9th Cir.1996) (quoting Baranowski v. State Bar of California, 24 Cal.3d 153, 164 n. 4, 154 Cal.Rptr. 752, 593 P.2d 613 (1979)), and because the court did not abuse its discretion in reducing the hourly rate or the number of hours Mario DiSalvo was entitled to be compensated for, see Fair Housing of Marin v. Combs, 285 F.3d 899, 907 (9th Cir.2002), the district court’s orders are AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
182 F. App'x 714, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/securities-exchange-commission-v-metropolis-holdings-ca9-2006.