Rich

United States v. Rich

Good Law
317 F. App'x 630
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 13, 2008No. 08-35212California431 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Peter C. McKittrick, as federal receiver for Pac Equities, Inc., moved the district court to approve the partial settlement agreement he and other plaintiffs had reached with some of the defendants in three Oregon state court actions, and to issue a bar order and injunction forbidding any action for contribution against the settling defendants. Hale Lane Peek Denni-son and two other defendants in the state court actions who were not parties to the settlement (collectively, “Hale Lane”) intervened in opposition to the motion to approve the settlement and issue the bar order and injunction. The district court approved the settlement and issued the requested bar order and injunction. Hale Lane timely appealed. We have jurisdiction to review the final judgment 1 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Hale Lane does not object to the settlement itself, but rather to the injunction, which (according to Hale Lane) purports to require the Oregon state court to use the pro tanto method, and not the proportional or any other method, to reduce any future judgment against Hale Lane. McKittrick, by contrast, denies that the district court placed any such restriction on…

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.