Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. Natural Beverage Distributors, D/B/A Mendocino Coast Distributing Co. Florence M. Beardslee

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that terminating sanctions are available when “a party has engaged deliberately in deceptive practices that undermine the integrity of judicial proceedings”
• noting that “[t]he district court has ‘broad fact-finding powers’ with respect to sanctions, and its findings warrant ‘great deference’ ”
• finding that counsel also used inadmissible evidence during closing in 16 an inflammatory manner
• upholding dismissal where party engaged in 6 deceptive practices that undermined the integrity of the proceedings
• upholding dismissal sanction 14 where the defendant “repeatedly lied to Anheuser and to the court throughout 15 every phase of [the] litigation” about business documents that were “directly 16 relevant to Anheuser’s discovery requests”
• upholding 27 28 1 Indeed, it is the jury who determines the credibility of both plaintiff and defendants. 1 dismissal where party engaged in deceptive practices that undermined the integrity of the 2 proceedings

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).