Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Pioneer Lumber Treating Inc. v. County of Hawaii

filed*fn*: July 19, 1991.

PIONEER LUMBER TREATING, INC.; PIONEER LUMBER & TREATING CO. OF KAWAIHAE, INC.; WILLIAM LEGG; MARK R. THOMASON, ESQ., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS
v.
COUNTY OF HAWAII; GUY PAUL; RALPH BATEMAN; JEFRI METHEANY; WAYNE DELUZ; BENTON BOLOS; WILLIAM SCHUMAN; RICHARD BETTS; LON TATUM, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES



Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii; David A. Ezra, District Judge, Presiding; DC No. CV-89-00511-DEA.

Brunetti, Kozinski, Rymer, Circuit Judges.

Order

Appellant was the attorney for plaintiffs Pioneer Lumber Treating, Inc., and others in a civil RICO action in the District Court for the District of Hawaii. In an order of January 22, 1990, the district court dismissed the complaint and imposed a Rule 11 sanction for the filing of a frivolous pleading. In an order clarifying the Rule 11 award, the court made clear its intent to impose the award on attorney Thomason, and not on the plaintiffs. Thomason appeals from the Rule 11 award and the clarifying order.

In making its Rule 11 award, the district court did not indicate the amount of the sanction, but rather left the determination of the fees and costs to a magistrate. The notice of appeal, and first amended notice of appeal, each dated November 21, 1990, appeal only from the district court's orders entered on January 22, 1990, granting defendant's motion to dismiss and [ILLEGIBLE WORD] sanctions, and on February 12, 1990, clarifying the Rule 11 award.

We ordered supplemental briefing to determine whether a final order quantifying the Rule 11 award has been entered. Although the parties disagree whether this court has jurisdiction under Jensen Elec. v. Moore, Caldwell, Rowland & Dodd, 873 F.2d 1327, 1329 (9th Cir. 1989), there is no dispute that no order regarding the amount of the Rule 11 award has been entered. It is our view that Jensen prevents appellate jurisdiction in this case.

DISMISS ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.