Shearson Loeb Rhoades, Inc. v. Quinard
SHEARSON LOEB RHOADES, INC., Gerald Jones and Roy Fink, Plaintiffs/Crossclaimants-Appellees v. Victor Fuentes QUINARD and Alma L. Fuentes, Defendants/Cross-defendants-Appellants WAGER BAY, N.V. v. SHEARSON/AMERICAN EXPRESS, INC., Defendant-Appellee SHEARSON/AMERICAN EXPRESS, INC., Crossclaimant-Appellee v. Victor Fuentes QUINARD, Crossdefendant-Appellant
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
FERGUSON, Circuit Judge:
This is a consolidated appeal of two actions involving commodity futures trading accounts. The facts which led to a default judgment against defendants in one action and the dismissal of the other arise out of the willful and deliberate disobedience of a discovery order, willful concealment of evidence, and attempted fabrication of false evidence.
The record demonstrates that the misconduct was so aggravated that the district court acted well within its discretion in rendering a default judgment against the defendants in action No. 83-6486. Fed.R. Civ.P. 37(b)(2)(C); United States v. Sumitomo Marine & Fire Insurance Co., 617 F.2d 1365, 1369 (9th Cir.1980).
The court did not err in dismissing the action in No. 84-5523, either. The pretrial order confirmed the fact that the plaintiff in that action was bound by the acts of the defendants in No. 83-6486.
We also find that the appeals are frivolous because the arguments of error are wholly without merit. Double costs and attorney fees are therefore warranted. Fed.R.App.P. 38; Gattuso v. Pecorella, 733 F.2d 709, 710 (9th Cir.1984).
It is therefore ordered:
1. The appeals in Nos. 83-6486 and 84-5523 are affirmed.
2. The appellees in both cases are awarded double costs against the appellants.
3. The appellees in both cases are awarded their attorney fees, the reasonable amounts of which are to be determined by affidavits to be filed within 20 days of the filing of this disposition. Appellants shall have 10 days to file a response.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 8 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- Shearson Loeb Rhoades, Inc., Gerald Jones and Roy Fink /crossclaimants- v. Victor Fuentes Quinard and Alma L
- United States v. High Country Broadcasting Company, Inc.
- Hal Commodity Cycles Management Co., an Arizona Corporation v. Riva Kirsh
- Chemtall, Inc. v. Citi-Chem, Inc.
- Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Noble Metals International, Inc.
- Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Noble Metals International, Inc., Moorgate Ltd., Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Noble Metals International, Inc., and Richard Schulze, Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Noble Metals International, Inc., and Richard D
Most recent
- Vickers v. Dance Unlimited, LLC
- Price Simms Holdings LLC v. Candle3, LLC
- Chemtall, Inc. v. Citi-Chem, Inc.
- Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Noble Metals International, Inc., Moorgate Ltd., Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Noble Metals International, Inc., and Richard Schulze, Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Noble Metals International, Inc., and Richard D
- Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Noble Metals International, Inc.
- United States v. High Country Broadcasting Company, Inc.
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.