Bradley Englebrick v. Worthington Industries

Good Law
620 F. App'x 564
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 6, 201513-56067, 13-56780California1,215 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiffs Bradley Englebrick and Roxanne Hernandez brought a products liability action against the defendants Wor-thington Industries, Inc. and Worthington Cylinders Wisconsin, LLC (together, “Worthington”), alleging injuries arising out of an explosion involving a gas cylinder. Worthington’s defense turned on whether Plaintiffs were under the influence of methamphetamine (“meth”) and were using the cylinder to smoke meth at the time of the accident. During discovery, Plaintiffs repeatedly lied under oath about their history of meth usage and when they had last consumed meth before the accident. After four years of litigation, they admitted this perjury while testifying during the second week of trial. The district court granted Worthington’s motion to dismiss the complaint on the basis of Plaintiffs’ perjury, but it denied Worthington’s motion for monetary sanctions against Plaintiffs’ counsel. Plaintiffs appeal from the dismissal of the action, and Worthington appeals from the district court’s denial of the motion for monetary sanctions. We affirm the district court’s dismissal of the action but remand for the district court to hold an evidentiary hearing on…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.