Zamani

Zamani v. Carnes

Bad Law
491 F.3d 990·2007 WL 1584577·68 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 477·2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 12863
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 4, 200704-17571California2,505 words

Opinion

Opinion

Holland, J.

Appellants H. Gene Carnes, Phillip Carnes, Jennifer Carnes, Kathryn Schal-ler, and Kevin Schaller (“the Carneses”) appeal the district court’s denial of their motion to strike and/ or dismiss and- their motion for reconsideration. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

I.

In January 2000, the Carneses, who were residents of Nevada, commenced a declaratory judgment action against appel-lees, California residents Michael A. Zama-ni and Nancy Miller-Wallaee, who was then married to Mr. Zamani and known as Nancy Zamani (“the Zamanis”). The Carneses prevailed in that action and a judgment for attorney fees and costs was entered against the Zamanis, which the Carneses filed with the Santa Clara County Recorder’s Office. The Zamanis appealed but did not file a supersedeas bond, although there were some negotiations between the parties as to the proper amount of such a bond. While the declaratory judgment action was still on appeal, the Carneses began to execute on the assets of the Zamanis. In December 2002, the Za-manis requested that the Carneses provide them with the correct amount still owing on the judgment so that they could close a third-party escrow.…

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.