From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brulotte v. Regimbal

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jan 4, 1967
368 F.2d 1003 (9th Cir. 1967)

Opinion

No. 20736.

November 21, 1966. Rehearing Denied January 4, 1967.

Arlington C. White, Margaret E. White, of White White, San Francisco, Cal., C.W. Halverson, of Halverson, Applegate, McDonald Weeks, Yakima, Wash., for appellants.

Gavin, Robinson, Kendrick, Redman Mays, Yakima, Wash., Seed Berry, Seattle, Wash., for appellees.

Before MADDEN, Judge of the Court of Claims, and MERRILL and BROWNING, Circuit Judges.


In our judgment the court's award of counsel fees for services involved in securing answers to interrogatories was well within the scope of its discretionary authority and did not constitute abuse of discretion. We attach no significance to the fact that the court worded its order in terms of the deposition during the taking of which answers to the interrogatories were refused, nor to the fact that in determining whether the interrogatories should be answered the court examined the incomplete deposition to ascertain the scope of the examination.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Brulotte v. Regimbal

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jan 4, 1967
368 F.2d 1003 (9th Cir. 1967)
Case details for

Brulotte v. Regimbal

Case Details

Full title:Lloyd BRULOTTE, an individual, and Melvin J. Newhouse, an individual…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jan 4, 1967

Citations

368 F.2d 1003 (9th Cir. 1967)

Citing Cases

United States v. Columbia Broadcasting System

Thus, as Wright and Miller note, "a court may be as inventive as the necessities of a particular case require…

Dalsing v. Pierce Cnty., Corp.

Thus, a court may be as inventive as the necessities of a particular case require in order to achieve the…