Hoffman v. Tonnemacher

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 discretion to consider successive motions for summary judgment
• holding that the 19 district court did not abuse its discretion when it permitted the defendants to file two 20 motions for summary judgment prior to trial and a third motion for summary judgment 21 following a mistrial
• observing that “allowing a party to file a second motion for summary judgment is logical, and it fosters the ‘just, speedy, and inexpensive’ resolution of suits.”
• holding that “district courts have discretion to entertain successive motions 5 for summary judgment” and noting that “allowing a party to file a second motion for 6 summary judgment” can be “logical” and “foster[ ] the ‘just, speedy, and inexpensive’ 7 resolution of suits”
• explaining that district courts have discretion to entertain successive motions for summary judgment
• “Allowing 17 || a successive summary judgment motion potentially can save all concerned the far greater 18 || expenses of a trial.”’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Dish Network Corp. v. Arrowood Indemnity Co.
  Tenth Circuit· 2014-11-25· cited 32×
• L-3 Communications Corp. v. Jaxon Engineering & Maintenance, Inc.
  D. Colorado· 2015-09-01· cited 28×
• Desiree Martinez v. Channon High
  Ninth Circuit· 2024-01-26· cited 24×
• Weeks v. Union Pacific Railroad
  E.D. California· 2015-10-07· cited 14×
• Martini E Ricci Lamino S.P.A.-Consortile Societa Agricola v. Trinity Fruit Sales Co.
  E.D. California· 2014-07-02· cited 10×
• Zurich American Insurance v. Watts Regulator Co.
  D. Massachusetts· 2012-03-22· cited 6×
• AAA Nevada Insurance v. Vinh Chau
  D. Nevada· 2010-07-15· cited 4×
• Beechwood Restorative Care Center v. Leeds
  W.D. New York· 2011-09-12· cited 4×
• Rivera v. Rochester Genesee Regional Transportation Authority
  W.D. New York· 2015-04-10· cited 1×
• McIntosh v. Maricopa County Community College District
  Ninth Circuit· 2011-09-01

Cites

16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 1986-06-25· cited 135,235×
• Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of Catrett
  Supreme Court· 1986-06-25· cited 119,442×
• Rubin Sira v. R. Morton, C. Artuz, D. Selsky, and G. Goord
  Second Circuit· 2004-08-17· cited 739×
• Larry Whitford v. Captain Boglino
  Seventh Circuit· 1995-08-30· cited 384×
• Ronald J. Fenney v. Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Company, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Amicus on Behalf of The
  Eighth Circuit· 2003-05-29· cited 221×
• Dorothy Kovacevich v. Kent State University
  Sixth Circuit· 2000-08-25· cited 206×
• Narducci v. Moore
  Seventh Circuit· 2009-07-09· cited 206×
• Freund v. Nycomed Amersham
  Ninth Circuit· 2003-10-21· cited 185×
• Williamsburg Wax Museum, Inc. v. Historic Figures, Inc.
  D.C. Circuit· 1987-01-27· cited 165×
• Billie J. Preaseau v. The Prudential Insurance Company of America
  Ninth Circuit· 1979-02-15· cited 143×
• Luisa M. Fernandez v. Bankers National Life Insurance Company
  Eleventh Circuit· 1990-09-25· cited 118×
• Ed Knox, an Individual v. Southwest Airlines, a Texas Corporation, and David Swafford Robert Hopper City of Phoenix, a Municipality
  Ninth Circuit· 1997-09-05· cited 112×
• Harold Wayne Enlow v. Tishomingo County, Mississippi, Jim Wall, in His Individual Capacity
  Fifth Circuit· 1992-08-06· cited 82×
• Lexicon, Inc. v. Safeco Insurance Company of America, Inc.
  Sixth Circuit· 2006-02-09· cited 74×
• McSherry v. City of Long Beach
  Ninth Circuit· 2005-09-08· cited 45×
• Dessar v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n
  Ninth Circuit· 1965-11-22· cited 26×

Other cases named Hoffman v. Tonnemacher

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• Hoffman v. Tonnemacher
  E.D. California· 2006-03-31· cited 5×