In Re 1441 Vet. Street Co., Debtor. Gold Coast Asset Acquisition, L.P. v. 1441 Vet. Street Co., & Levene & Eisenberg, 154 F.3d 1103 (9th Cir. 1998). · Go Syfert
Search
In Re 1441 Vet. Street Co., Debtor. Gold Coast Asset Acquisition, L.P. v. 1441 Vet. Street Co., & Levene & Eisenberg, 154 F.3d 1103 (9th Cir. 1998). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Wetlands Action Network, a California Non-Profit Organization Ballona Wetlands Land Trust, a California Non-Profit Organization v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, an Agency of the United States Michal R. Robinson, in His Capacity as District Engineer of the United States Army Corps of Engineers Joe N. Ballard, in His Capacity as Chief Engineer of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and Playa Capital Company, L.L.C., as Successor-In-Interest to Maguire Thomas Partners-Playa Vista, Defendantintervenorappellant. Wetlands Action Network, a California Non-Profit Organization California Public Interest Research Group, and Ballona Wetlands Land Trust, a California Non-Profit Organization v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, an Agency of the United States Michal r.robinson, in His Capacity as District Engineer of the United States Army Corps of Engineers Joe N. Ballard, in His Capacity as Chief Engineer of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and Playa Capital Company, L.L.C., as Successor-In-Interest to Maguire Thomas Partners-Playa Vista, Defendant-Intervenor-Appellee. Wetlands Action Network, a California Non-Profit Organization Ballona Wetlands Land Trust, a California Non-Profit Organization California Public Interest Research Group v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, an Agency of the United States Joe n.ballard, in His Capacity as Chief Engineer of the United States Army Corps of Engineers Robert L. Davis, Col. (ca9, 2000-08-21)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited as authority (rule) Wetlands Action Network, a California Non-Profit Organization Ballona Wetlands Land Trust, a California Non-Profit Organization v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, an Agency of the United States Michal R. Robinson, in His Capacity as District Engineer of the United States Army Corps of Engineers Joe N. Ballard, in His Capacity as Chief Engineer of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and Playa Capital Company, L.L.C., as Successor-In-Interest to Maguire Thomas Partners-Playa Vista, Defendantintervenorappellant. Wetlands Action Network, a California Non-Profit Organization California Public Interest Research Group, and Ballona Wetlands Land Trust, a California Non-Profit Organization v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, an Agency of the United States Michal r.robinson, in His Capacity as District Engineer of the United States Army Corps of Engineers Joe N. Ballard, in His Capacity as Chief Engineer of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and Playa Capital Company, L.L.C., as Successor-In-Interest to Maguire Thomas Partners-Playa Vista, Defendant-Intervenor-Appellee. Wetlands Action Network, a California Non-Profit Organization Ballona Wetlands Land Trust, a California Non-Profit Organization California Public Interest Research Group v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, an Agency of the United States Joe n.ballard, in His Capacity as Chief Engineer of the United States Army Corps of Engineers Robert L. Davis, Col.
9th Cir. · 2000 · confidence medium
Id. at 1106. 32 MTP-PV's assertion that Ninth Circuit precedent prevents us from adopting a broad interpretation of Churchill County is without merit.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Wetlands Action Network v. United States Army Corps of Engineers
9th Cir. · 2000 · confidence medium
Id. at 1106.
cited Cited "see, e.g." Larmanger v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan
D. Or. · 2012 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See also Found. for Horses and Other Animals v. Babbitt, 154 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir.1998) (same).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In Re 1441 VETERAN STREET CO., Debtor. GOLD COAST ASSET ACQUISITION, L.P., Appellant,
v.
1441 VETERAN STREET CO., and Levene & Eisenberg, Appellee
96-56445.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Sep 10, 1998.
154 F.3d 1103
Schroeder, Kozinski, Whyte.
Published

ORDER

The opinion is hereby amended (1) to delete the following sentences appearing in the second-to-last paragraph of the opinion: “However, it appears that L & E raises this argument for the first time on appeal. Therefore, L & E is precluded from raising this argument. See United States v. Flores-Payon, 942 F.2d 556, 558 (9th Cir.1991) (Ts-sues not presented to trial court cannot generally be raised for the first time on appeal.’)” and (2) to substitute therefor: “However, L & E points to insufficient facts to justify application of the exception and the bankruptcy court made no finding that would support the application.”

The panel as constituted above has voted to deny the petition for rehearing and to reject the suggestion for rehearing en banc.

The full court has been advised of the suggestion for rehearing en banc and no judge of the court has requested a vote on the suggestion for rehearing en banc. Fed. R.App. P. 35.

The petition for rehearing is denied and the suggestion for rehearing en banc is rejected.