From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Alward v. Burrelle's Information Services

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 28, 2003
79 F. App'x 953 (9th Cir. 2003)

Opinion

Submitted Oct. 8, 2003.

This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona; Roslyn O. Silver, District Judge, Presiding.

Jathan W. Janove, Janove Baar Associates, LC, Salt Lake City, UT, Amy Jo Gittler, Tricia Brown, Frazer, Ryan, Goldberg, Arnold & Gittler, for Defendant-Appellee.


Before PREGERSON, BEAM, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

The Honorable C. Arlen Beam, Senior Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Appellant Brian Finander appeals from the August 9, 2002, district court order awarding fees and costs as sanctions against Appellant and his law firm in the amount of $9,476.88. We find no abuse of discretion in the district court's imposition of attorneys' fees and costs in the amount of $9,476.88 against counsel Brian E. Finander and the Law Corporation of Brian Finander, P.C., jointly and severally. Patelco Credit Union v. Sahni, 262 F.3d 897, 912-13 (9th Cir.2001) ("A district court's sanction order is reviewed for abuse of discretion whether imposed pursuant to Rule 11, Rule 37, or 28 U.S.C. § 1927.").

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Alward v. Burrelle's Information Services

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Oct 28, 2003
79 F. App'x 953 (9th Cir. 2003)
Case details for

Alward v. Burrelle's Information Services

Case Details

Full title:Terri A. ALWARD; et al., Plaintiffs, v. BURRELLE'S INFORMATION SERVICES, a…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Oct 28, 2003

Citations

79 F. App'x 953 (9th Cir. 2003)