City Of Los Angeles, Harbor Division, A Municipal Corporation, Petitioner-Appellant v. Santa Monica Baykeeper

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the 24 district court could rescind a previous order certifying an 25 interlocutory appeal before the appellate court acted
• holding that district courts have the inherent power 10 “to rescind, reconsider, or modify an interlocutory order” at any time
• holding that district 14 |;court had discretion to reconsider its own order sua sponte
• finding this divestiture of jurisdiction 19 || applies to interlocutory appeals as well
• finding trial court did not err in issuing an order without receiving a reply where appellant “was not prevented by the [court] from responding” and “its decision not to submit a reply brief was entirely voluntary”
• “[T]he filing of a 13 notice of interlocutory appeal divests the district court of jurisdiction over the particular issues 14 involved in that appeal.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).