Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Edwards v. Richey, 99-50627 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 99-50627 Visitors: 9
Filed: Mar. 10, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No.99-50627 _ BYARD EDWARDS, JR., Plaintiff-Appellant, R. GAINES GRIFFIN, Appellant, versus H. L. RICHEY; I. KEITH GORDAN; MARK W. TURNBOUGH, Defendants-Appellees. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Pecos Lower Court No. P-98-CV-65 _ March 3, 2000 Before JONES, DUHÉ, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The court has carefully considered this appeal in light of the briefs, oral argument and
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _______________________ No.99-50627 _______________________ BYARD EDWARDS, JR., Plaintiff-Appellant, R. GAINES GRIFFIN, Appellant, versus H. L. RICHEY; I. KEITH GORDAN; MARK W. TURNBOUGH, Defendants-Appellees. _________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Pecos Lower Court No. P-98-CV-65 _________________________________________________________________ March 3, 2000 Before JONES, DUHÉ, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The court has carefully considered this appeal in light of the briefs, oral argument and pertinent portions of the record. The factual basis for the trial court’s imposition of sanctions does not appear to be clearly erroneous. We conclude, however, that the amount of sanctions imposed represents an abuse of discretion, given such factors as the short time between plaintiffs’ discovery that they were mistaken about the factual basis for the lawsuit and their offer to dismiss the case. Under * Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. all the circumstances, the sanction should not have exceeded $11,500.00. The judgment is AFFIRMED as MODIFIED to reflect a sanction award of $11,500.00. 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer