Kearney

Kearney v. Foley & Lardner, LLP

Good Law
590 F.3d 638·2009 WL 4641743
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 12, 2009No. 07-55566California5,070 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Ezra, J.

ORDER AMENDING OPINION AND DENYING THE PETITION FOR REHEARING AND AMENDED OPINION

ORDER

The opinion filed on May 12, 2009, and amended September 18, 2009, is further amended as follows: Slip opinion at page 13572, paragraph 2, line 10, delete “are” and replace it with “may be.” On line 10 delete the sentence “The California Penal Code ... keep it from being produced.”

With these changes, Appellant’s petition for rehearing is DENIED.

OPINION

Joan Kearney (“Kearney”) appeals the district court’s dismissal of the federal and state law claims she filed against a representative of the Ramona Unified School District (“RUSD”) and the law firm that represented RUSD (collectively “Defendants”) in an earlier eminent domain proceeding regarding her property. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . As to Kearney’s federal law claims, we vacate the district court’s judgment and remand so that those claims may be heard. *642 As to Kearney’s state law claims, we affirm the district court.

I. Background

A. Events Leading Up to the State Valuation Trial

We must begin, not with the case at hand, but with the earlier eminent domain proceedings from which Kearney’s current claims…

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.