Telluride Management Solutions, Inc. v. Telluride Investment Group

Good Law
55 F.3d 463·31 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1062·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 11814·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3705
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 19, 199593-56161California2,413 words

Opinion

Opinion

55 F.3d 463 63 USLW 2743 , 31 Fed.R.Serv.3d 1062 TELLURIDE MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS, INC.; Telluride Investment Partners I; Telluride Investment Partners II, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. TELLURIDE INVESTMENT GROUP, Defendant, John H. Steel; Robert D. Korn, Appellants. No. 93-56161. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Feb. 9, 1995. Decided May 19, 1995. John H. Steel, Telluride, CO, for appellants. William M. Hensley, Richard L. Fahrney and Vickie Lynn Bibro, Menke, Fahrney & Carroll, Costa Mesa, CA, for plaintiffs-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Before: BEEZER and NOONAN, Circuit Judges, and EZRA, District Judge. * Opinion by Judge BEEZER; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge NOONAN. BEEZER, Circuit Judge: 1 In the context of a dispute over the imposition of sanctions for discovery violations, we consider the question whether a party is substantially justified in failing to appear for a deposition when the complaint has been dismissed with leave to amend. We also address whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37 authorizes sanctions for a motion for reconsideration of a…

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.