Roberts v. Heim

Good Law
967 F.2d 590·1992 WL 137256·1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 24430
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 17, 199292-15462California892 words

Opinion

Opinion

967 F.2d 590 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Philip D. ROBERTS; Lynn Roberts; Denny Delk; Karen Delk; Jack T. Bell; Arthur B. Gauss, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated.; Plaintiffs-Appellees, CUSTOM WELLHEAD SERVICES, INC. Appellant v. Werner HEIM; Gary E. Krause, Defendants. No. 92-15462. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted June 9, 1992. Decided June 17, 1992. Before GOODWIN, SCHROEDER and BEEZER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Custom Wellhead appeals the order of the district court denying its motion to intervene into this highly complex securities fraud case pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 24(a). An order completely denying a party the ability to intervene is appealable as a final order under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We have jurisdiction and affirm. 3 In 1986 Custom Wellhead purchased two promissory notes previously executed by Cardinal Oil, a defendant in the underlying controversy, in favor of Hemisphere…

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.