Cmax, Inc. v. Hall

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that district courts have the 21 inherent power to control the disposition of the causes on its docket in a manner which will 22 promote economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants
• granting a stay where facts developed in a pending administrative proceeding would assist the court in resolving its current action
• finding delay in obtaining relief insufficient to show irreparable injury or miscarriage of justice
• granting the stay and noting that the plaintiff is only seeking damages
• “the orderly course of justice 17 measured in terms of the simplifying or complicating of issues” is a key consideration
• district courts possess 1 promote economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

30 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

• Cmax, Inc. v. Hall
  Ninth Circuit· 1962-03-19· cited 153×
• Pet Milk Company v. Willis W. Ritter, Carnation Company v. Willis W. Ritter, Continental Baking Company v. Willis W. Ritter
  Tenth Circuit· 1963-10-21· cited 134×
• Filtrol Corporation and Texaco, Inc. v. The Honorable Robert J. Kelleher, United States District Judge
  Ninth Circuit· 1973-01-08· cited 37×
• Robbins Flooring, Inc. v. Federal Floors, Inc.
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 1977-09-28· cited 30×
• Adelson v. Smith (In Re Smith)
  D. Nevada· 2008-06-24· cited 29×
• Singer v. Las Vegas Athletic Clubs
  D. Nevada· 2019-03-25· cited 28×
• Adkins v. J.B. Hunt Transp., Inc.
  E.D. California· 2018-03-20· cited 25×
• Ali v. Trump
  W.D. Washington· 2017-03-17· cited 18×
• Security Pacific National Bank v. Government & State of Iran
  C.D. California· 1981-04-30· cited 17×
• Fisher Controls Co., Inc. v. Control Components, Inc.
  S.D. Iowa· 1977-11-15· cited 16×
• Stoltz v. Fry Foods, Inc.
  D. Idaho· 2014-10-13· cited 10×
• Unnamed case
  Ninth Circuit· 1985-07-03· cited 9×
• Hawai'i v. Trump
  D. Hawaii· 2017-02-09· cited 9×
• An Giang Agriculture & Food Import Export Co. v. United States
  Court of International Trade· 2004-10-08· cited 7×
• Adobe Lumber, Inc. v. Hellman
  E.D. California· 2006-01-04· cited 7×
• Fishman Jackson PLLC v. Israely
  N.D. Texas· 2016-04-12· cited 7×
• Stephens v. Comenity, LLC
  D. Nevada· 2017-12-08· cited 7×
• Home Insurance v. Coastal Lumber Co.
  N.D. Georgia· 1983-12-02· cited 5×
• Nicholson v. REI Energy, LLC
  D. Oregon· 2019-02-28· cited 5×
• In re Galena Biopharma, Inc.
  D. Oregon· 2015-02-04· cited 4×

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Landis v. North American Co.
  Supreme Court· 1936-12-07· cited 5,442×
• La Buy v. Howes Leather Co.
  Supreme Court· 1957-01-14· cited 664×
• Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Central Iron & Coal Co.
  Supreme Court· 1924-05-05· cited 293×
• Cmax, Inc., Also D. B. A. City Messenger of Hollywood and City Messenger Air Express v. Drewry Photocolor Corporation
  Ninth Circuit· 1961-10-24· cited 49×
• F. Burkhart Mfg. Co. v. Fort Worth & D. C. Ry. Co.
  Eighth Circuit· 1945-06-25· cited 26×
• United States v. Honorable James M. Carter
  Ninth Circuit· 1959-09-21· cited 21×
• Chronicle Publishing Co. v. National Broadcasting Co.
  Ninth Circuit· 1961-07-25· cited 19×
• Pettibone v. Richardson
  Seventh Circuit· 1942-04-07· cited 14×

Other cases named Cmax, Inc. v. Hall

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• Cmax, Inc. v. Hall
  Ninth Circuit· 1962-03-19· cited 153×
• Cmax, Inc. v. Hall
  Ninth Circuit· 1961-03-30· cited 4×