Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v. United States Dist. Court For The Dist. Of Alaska, 823 F.2d 382 (9th Cir. 1987). · Go Syfert
Search
Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v. United States Dist. Court For The Dist. Of Alaska, 823 F.2d 382 (9th Cir. 1987). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
4 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: On Command Video Corp. v. LodgeNet Entertainment Corp. (cand, 1997-08-08)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." On Command Video Corp. v. LodgeNet Entertainment Corp.
N.D. Cal. · 1997 · signal: see also · confidence low
“A discovery order, unlike a final order, is interlocutory and nonappealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 .” City of Las Vegas v. Foley, 747 F.2d 1294, 1297 (9th Cir.1984) (citing Hartley Pen Co. v. United States District Court, 287 F.2d 324, 326-27 (9th Cir.1961)); See also Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v. United States Distñct Court for the District of Alaska, 788 F.2d 1408 , 1410 n. 2 (1986) vacating as moot, 823 F.2d 382 , 383 (9th Cir.1987).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale
v.
United States District Court for the District of Alaska, and Sharon Griffis, Personal Representative of the Estate of Daniel D. Doran, Deceased, Real Party in Interest
85-7556.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Jul 31, 1987.
823 F.2d 382
Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 68%
Citer courts: District of Columbia (1)

823 F.2d 382

SOCIETE NATIONALE INDUSTRIELLE AEROSPATIALE, Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR the DISTRICT OF ALASKA, Respondent,
and
Sharon Griffis, Personal Representative of the Estate of
Daniel D. Doran, Deceased, Real Party In Interest.

No. 85-7556.

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

July 31, 1987.

Lillick, McHose & Charles and Stephen C. Johnson, San Francisco, Cal.; Rice, Hoppner, Brown & Brunner and Patrick T. Brown, Fairbanks, Alaska, for petitioner.

Young & Sanders and Joseph L. Young, Anchorage, Alaska, for real party in interest.

Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the District of Alaska; James A. Von Der Heydt, Judge.

Before ANDERSON, SKOPIL and ALARCON, Circuit Judges.ORDER

1

During the pendency of petitioner's request for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing en banc, the parties have advised the court that the matter has been settled. In light of that settlement, we dismiss the appeal as moot. Our prior opinion, reported at 788 F.2d 1408, is hereby vacated.