Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

17-55655 - In re: Westwood Plaza North, et al v. Theodor Bodnar, et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
17-55655 - In re: Westwood Plaza North, et al v. Theodor Bodnar, et al
April 9, 2018
PDF | More
Filed per curiam opinion (KIM MCLANE WARDLAW, RONALD M. GOULD and PAUL J. WATFORD) Appellees filed the motion for sanctions on October 26, 2017, within the time prescribed by Ninth Circuit Rule 39-1.6. See 9th Cir. R. 39-1.6(a). Having concluded that the motion for sanctions is timely, we now turn to the merits of the motion. We have considered the motion and appellant’s opposition thereto, and grant in part the motion for sanctions. Appellant’s motion to strike the motion for sanctions is denied. We refer the determination of an appropriate award of attorney’s fees as damages under Rule 38 to this court’s Appellate Commissioner, who shall conduct whatever proceedings he deems appropriate, and who shall have authority to enter an order awarding fees. See 9th Cir. R. 39.1.6. The Appellate Commissioner’s order is subject to reconsideration. Id. Appellees did not file a timely bill of costs in this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 39(d); 9th Cir. R. 39-1.1. Accordingly, we deny in part the motion for sanctions under Rule 38 with respect to appellees’ request for double costs for this appeal. [SEE OPINION FOR FULL TEXT]; GRANTED IN PART; DENIED IN PART. [10828454]
May 1, 2018
PDF | More
Filed order and amended opinion (KIM MCLANE WARDLAW, RONALD M. GOULD and PAUL J. WATFORD)The per curiam opinion filed on April 9, 2018 is amended as follows: At slip op. page 6, lines 14–21, delete “See 28 U.S.C. § 1927 (sanctions for filings which unreasonably and vexatiously multiply the proceedings); Wages v. I.R.S., 915 F.2d 1230, 1235–36 (9th Cir. 1990) (sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 may be imposed on pro se litigant for bad faith filings); Barnd v. City of Tacoma, 664 F.2d 1339, 1343 (9th Cir. 1982) (finding of bad faith or intentional misconduct by counsel required for award of sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1927).” An amended opinion is filed concurrently with this order. [10856456]