Douglas Estrada v. Speno & Cohen, Attorneys at Law Sarah Speno David B. Cohen
Estrada v. Speno & Cohen, Attorneys at Law Sarah Speno David B. Cohen, 244 F.3d 1050 (9th Cir. 2001)
Opinion
244 F.3d 1050 (9th Cir. 2001)
DOUGLAS ESTRADA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SPENO & COHEN, Attorneys at Law; SARAH SPENO; DAVID B. COHEN,Defendants-Appellants.
No. 99-56013
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Argued and Submitted February 6, 2001--Pasadena, California Filed March 30, 2001 1
NOTE: SEE NEW OPINION OF MAY 24, 2001.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 5 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(finding no abuse of discretion in the district court’s failure to consider alternative sanctions where the party thrice failed to attend scheduled hearings)
-
(federal 5 13 courts have the inherent authority to impose sanctions for bad faith conduct during litigation, or 14 || for willfully ignoring a court order)
-
(a warning that failure to obey a court order will result in UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. CV 23-4054 PA (MARx)
-
(failure to appear at depositions and court hearings)
Cited by 42 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- Toyrrific, LLC v. Edvin Karapetian
- Diane Schroeder v. Stephen Hundley
- Phenylpropanolamine (Ppa) Products Liability Litigation, Shantell Allen, on Behalf of Allen, Vera v. Bayer Corporation, Leon Anderson, Jr. v
- Allen ex rel. Allen v. Bayer Corp.
- Cooper v. Marylind Foundation
- Magarian v. Monarch Life Insurance
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.