Epstein Secrets

p P 34(a) February 26, 1999, Filed NOTICE: ['l] DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION PRIOR HISTORY: Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. DC No. CV-97-0431-EFL. Eugene F. Lynch, District Judge, Presiding. Reported in Full-Text Format at: 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 3353. OPIN

trict court's order is not immediately appealable [FINS] under the "collateral order" exception to the final judgment rule set forth in Cohen rig v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 546-47. 93 L. Ed. 1528. 69 S. Ct. 1221 (1949). Under Cohen, an interlocutory order is immediately appealable if, inter a

ciency of a pleading." Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(f). The oNy case cited by BIC with regard to Rule 9(I) is MiCOl Indus_ Inc. v. C2JS Holdngs. Inc.. in which the Northern District of Alabama briefly summarized the allegations in the complaint before it and found that it satisfied the requirements of Rules 9(b) and 9(t). Miser

sly contracted to modify the note's terms, those modified terms were what Green Tree was assigned. (See Mod. Agreement); Morse Elec. Prod. Corp. v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Co., 90 Wn.2d 195, 579 P.2d 1341, 1342 (Wash.1978) (holding that an assignee cannot acquire any rights in excess of what the assignor has the

1983) CASE SUMMARY: PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Plaintiffs, a corporation and its president, appealed the judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, which granted summary judgment in favor of defendant distributors in plaintiffs' suit alleging For internal use only CONFIDENTIAL - PU

ict court's order is not immediately appealable [HN5] under the "collateral order" exception to the final judgment rule set forth in Cohen (**11] v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 546-47, 93 L. Ed. 1528, 69 S. Ct. 1221 (1949). Under Cohen, an interlocutory order is immediately appealable if, inter a