From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Sep 14, 2001
275 F.3d 1187 (9th Cir. 2001)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

affirming district court's order dismissing a petition to vacate under Rule 12(b) on the basis that the arbitrator's decision drew its essence from the CBA

Summary of this case from Teamsters Local 856 v. Delta Dental of Cal.
See 25 Summaries

Opinion

Nos. 99-15602, 99-17186.

Argued and Submitted October 4, 2000.

Filed September 14, 2001. Amended December 28, 2001.

Paul F. Utrecht, Law Offices of Paul F. Utrecht, San Francisco, California, for plaintiff-appellant Sprewell.

Richard R. Dale, Law Offices of Richard R. Dale, Mill Valley, California for plaintiffs-appellants Thompson, et al.

Jeffrey A. Mishkin (Argued), Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher Flom LLP, New York, New York, for the defendant-appellees.

Frank Rothman (On the Briefs) and Marie L. Hurabiell (On the Briefs), Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher Flom LLP, Los Angeles, California, for defendant National Basketball Association.

Martin P. Moroski (On the Briefs), Sinsheimer, Schiebelhut Baggett, San Luis Obispo, California, for the defendants-appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; Vaughn R. Walker, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-98-02053-VRW.

Before: D.W. NELSON, THOMPSON, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

The Opinion filed September 14, 2001, is amended as follows:

At Slip Op. 13304-13305 [266 F.3d 979, 989], in the sentence which begins "The arbitration award effectively and persuasively fleshes out the fact . . .", delete the portion of the sentence that reads, " The arbitration award effectively and persuasively fleshes out the fact that the actions taken by the NBA and the Warriors were motivated solely by Sprewell's misconduct and were not, as Sprewell states," and substitute " The uncontested facts set forth in the arbitration award effectively and persuasively rebut the conclusory allegations made by Sprewell, that the actions taken by the NBA and the Warriors were" The sentence would then read:

The uncontested facts set forth in the arbitration award effectively and persuasively rebut the conclusory allegations made by Sprewell, that the actions taken by the NBA and the Warriors were the product of America's "fear of the black man's physicality and rage, and the fear and resentment of the black man's success, along with the corresponding anger that the black man is not grateful for what he has been `given.'"

With these amendments, the panel as constituted above has voted to deny appellees, National Basketball Association's, and appellant, Latrell Sprewell's, petitions for rehearing. Judge Trott has voted to deny the petitions for rehearing en banc, and Judges D.W. Nelson and Thompson so recommend. The full court has been advised of the suggestions for rehearing en banc and no judge of the court has requested a vote on it. Fed.R.App.P. 35(b).

The petitions for rehearing and the petitions for rehearing en banc are DENIED.

Summaries of

Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Sep 14, 2001
275 F.3d 1187 (9th Cir. 2001)

affirming district court's order dismissing a petition to vacate under Rule 12(b) on the basis that the arbitrator's decision drew its essence from the CBA

Summary of this case from Teamsters Local 856 v. Delta Dental of Cal.

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Davison v. Gerrits

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Charley v. Gleason

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Soto-Lopez v. Falke

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Nichols v. GEO Grp.

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Collins v. Traxinger

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Peters v. Jeffords

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from James v. Wuya

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Dillard v. Sherer

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Matthews v. Dep't of Corr.

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Whisler v. Dunford

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Bailey v. Einerson

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Charley v. Alaska State Trooper Sommerville

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Shirley v. Kristiansen

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Tholson v. Luper

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Katchatag v. Dahlstrom

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Cornette v. Altepeter

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Dillard v. Scarborough

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from James v. Mun

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Berg v. Equifax Data Breach Settlement

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Allen v. State

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from James v. Meritt

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Smith v. Alaska

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including ... details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Davison v. Sidders

noting that a plaintiff can “plead himself out of a claim by including . . . details contrary to his claims”

Summary of this case from Mattila v. City of Wasilla
Case details for

Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors

Case Details

Full title:Latrell F. SPREWELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Sep 14, 2001

Citations

275 F.3d 1187 (9th Cir. 2001)

Citing Cases

Stevens v. Knowles

Exhibits that contradict the allegations of a complaint may fatally undermine those allegations. Sprewell v.…

McGary v. Palomero

The defendants cite Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors, 266 F.3d 979, 988-89 (9th Cir.), opinion amended on…

683 Citing Cases