Van Scoy v. Shell Oil Co.

Good Law
11 F. App'x 847
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 5, 2001No. 00-15087; D.C. No. CV-97-02610-MHPCalifornia2,601 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM

This appeal of sanctions is brought by two commercial fishermen and their attorney, Charles Kinney. Finding the appellants claims duplicative and frivolous, the district court ordered Kinney to pay $63,944.11 in attorneys’ fees and costs to the defendants pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927 . Appellants contend that the district court abused its discretion in awarding sanctions and in the amount of sanctions awarded. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

I. Background

Litigation relevant to the instant appeal began in 1993 when Van Scoy, aided by attorney Charles Kinney, filed a state tort action against Shell for nuisance, trespass and business loss resulting from Shell’s operation of an oil refinery adjacent to the harbor in Martinez, California (hereinafter “Van Scoy I ”). Van Scoy claimed physical and emotional injuries, and economic injuries to his fishing business allegedly due to selenium 2 in wastewater discharged *849 by the Shell refinery in the Martinez harbor. In 1995 after removal of Van Scoy I to federal court and discovery, district court Judge Fern Smith granted summary judgment in favor of Shell. Judge Smith found that Van Scoy…

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.