Teaford v. Ford Motor Company

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a district court’s referral to the state bar association was “not an appealable sanction” because it was “neither an implicit nor an explicit finding of misconduct”
• holding that a referral without a finding of misconduct is not appealable
• where a purported injury does “not rise to the level of a sanction order, then [the plaintiff] has nothing from which to appeal, and we lack jurisdiction” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “[T]he mere referral of a matter to the disciplinary committee, without any 12 finding of misconduct, is not appealable. . . . [E]ven the broadest understanding of what 13 constitutes an appealable sanction requires a finding of misconduct.”
• “[T]he 3 mere referral of a matter to the disciplinary committee, without any finding of misconduct, is not 4 appealable . . . . [E]ven the broadest understanding of what constitutes an appealable sanction 5 requires a finding of misconduct.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).