Freeman

Freeman v. Lasky, Haas & Cohler

Good Law
410 F.3d 1180·2005 WL 1389122
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 13, 200503-56588California1,640 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kozinski, J.

We consider the applicability of NoerrPennington immunity to discovery misconduct.

Facts

Realtor Arleen Freeman subscribes to a regional real-estate Multiple Listing Ser vice (MLS) run by Sandicor, a corporation owned and managed by various local realtors’ associations. Charging that Sandicor’s MLS subscription fees were fixed at artificially high levels, Freeman sued Sandicor, the realtors’ associations, and some of their officers and directors under the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 , 2. The defendants in that litigation wrongfully withheld information in discovery. After the misconduct came to light, the district court granted new discovery and sanctioned the defendants, but it nonetheless granted their motion for summary judgment. On appeal, we affirmed in part and reversed in part. Freeman v. San Diego Ass’n of Realtors, 322 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir.2003).

Freeman now brings a new antitrust action against some of the executives, lawyers and law firms of the associations involved in the previous litigation, and against the state realtors’ association directly, based on the discovery misconduct that, she claims, involved subornation of perjury and intimidation of witnesses. Freeman…

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.