Brandise v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit December 26, 1989

Brandise v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc., 892 F.2d 82 (9th Cir. 1989)

1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 19482; 1989 WL 155919

Opinion

892 F.2d 82

NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
Joseph R. BRANDISE and Georgia Brandise, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
SHEARSON LEHMAN HUTTON, INC., aka Shearson Lehman/American
Express, Inc., a Delaware corporation; WILLIAM
GOODWIN, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 88-15689.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 15, 1989.*
Decided Dec. 26, 1989.

Before REINHARDT, BEEZER and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

We hereby dismiss the Brandises' appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction. See 9 U.S.C. § 15(b) ("an appeal may not be taken from an interlocutory order ... (1) granting a stay of an action under section 3 of this title [or] (2) directing arbitration to proceed under section 4 of this title"); Gooding v. Shearson Lehman Bros., Inc., 878 F.2d 281 (9th Cir. 1989). Appellees' motion for sanctions is denied.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); Circuit Rule 34-4

Reference

Full Case Name: Joseph R. Brandise and Georgia Brandise v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc., AKA Shearson Lehman/american Express, Inc., a Delaware Corporation William Goodwin
Status: Unpublished