From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jinro America Inc. v. Secure Investments

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Sep 14, 2001
272 F.3d 1289 (9th Cir. 2001)

Opinion

No. 99-16133.

Argued and Submitted November 16, 2000.

Filed September 14, 2001. Amended December 5, 2001.

Dale A. Danneman and Susan M. Freeman, Lewis and Roca LLP, Phoenix, Arizona, for the plaintiffs-appellants.

Ronald J. Ellett, P.C., Phoenix, Arizona, for defendant-appellee Landmark Forwarding Companies, Inc.

Thaine M. Crown, Jr., Phoenix, Arizona, for defendants-appellees Cobbi International Food Products, Brian Bishop and Patricia Bishop.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona; Owen M. Panner, Senior District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-95-01787-OMP.

Before: WALLACE, FISHER and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.


ORDER AMENDING OPINION AND DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING

The opinion filed September 14, 2001 [ 266 F.3d 993], is amended as follows:

At slip op. 13284, line 14 [ 266 F.3d at 1010], insert footnote number 9 after ". . . opinion."

9 Because the district court's grant of summary judgment on Jinro's fraud claim expressly assumed that Jinro's "claims all rest on proof that the parties intended to be bound by the JPA," that judgment is reversed as well.

With this amendment, Appellant's petition for rehearing is DENIED.


Summaries of

Jinro America Inc. v. Secure Investments

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Sep 14, 2001
272 F.3d 1289 (9th Cir. 2001)
Case details for

Jinro America Inc. v. Secure Investments

Case Details

Full title:JINRO AMERICA INC., a Washington corporation; JR International…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Sep 14, 2001

Citations

272 F.3d 1289 (9th Cir. 2001)

Citing Cases

Lam Research Corporation v. Schunk Semiconductor

Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(b). Whether to grant bifurcation is left to the sound discretion of the district court.…

Ginena v. Alaska Airlines, Inc.

"The Supreme Court interpreted Rule 702 and articulated general guidelines for its application in Daubert v.…