U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2009

SOCIETE CIVILE SUCCESSION GUINO v. Renoir

SOCIETE CIVILE SUCCESSION GUINO v. Renoir
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided April 1, 2009 · Mary M. Schroeder, D.W. Nelson and Stephen Reinhardt, Circuit Judges
561 F.3d 969 (Federal Reporter, Third Series)

SOCIETE CIVILE SUCCESSION GUINO v. Renoir

Opinion

561 F.3d 969 (2009)

SOCIETE CIVILE SUCCESSION RICHARD GUINO, a french trust, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Jean-Emmanuel RENOIR, an individual, Defendant-Appellant, and
Beseder Inc., doing business as Rima Fine Art; Dror Darel, husband; Tracy L. Penwell, wife, Defendants.
Societe Civile Succession Richard Guino, a french trust, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Jean-Emmanuel Renoir, an individual, Defendant, and
Beseder Inc., doing business as Rima Fine Art; Dror Darel, husband; Tracy L. Penwell, wife, Defendants-Appellants.
Societe Civile Succession Richard Guino, a french trust, Plaintiff-Appellant,
Richard W. Morris; Morris Law Firm, PLLC, Appellants,
v.
Jean-Emmanuel Renoir, an individual; Beseder Inc., doing business as Rima Fine Art; Dror Darel, husband; Tracy L. Penwell, wife, Defendants-Appellees.

Nos. 07-15582, 07-15583, 07-17209.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

April 1, 2009.

Richard W. Morris, Esquire, Artemio Reategui, Esquire, Richard W. Stevens, *970 Morris Law Firm, PLLC, Surprise, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Michael R. Hambly, Esquire, David Paul Steiner, Esquire, David Steiner & Associats, Los Angeles, CA, Ray K. Harris, Esquire, Fennemore Craig PC, Phoenix, AZ, for Defendant-Appellant.

Phil Scot Flemming, Esquire, Phoenix, AZ, Joshua J. Kaufman, Esquire, Venable LLP, Washington, DC, for Defendants.

Before: MARY M. SCHROEDER, D.W. NELSON and STEPHEN REINHARDT, Circuit Judges.

ORDER DENYING PETITIONS FOR REHEARING EN BANC

ORDER

Judge Schroeder and Judge Reinhardt voted to deny the petitions for rehearing en banc. Judge Nelson recommended denial of the petitions for rehearing en banc.

The full court has been advised of the petitions for rehearing en banc and no active judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. (Fed. R.App. P. 35.)

The petitions for rehearing en banc are DENIED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.