1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 151 F.3d
  5. 151 F.3d 1234 (1998)
 

LINNEY v. CELLULAR ALASKA PARTNERSHIP

Nos. 97-16637, 97-16638, 97-16639 and 97-16640.

151 F.3d 1234 (1998)

Warren LINNEY, an individual, and all persons similarly situated, Plaintiff, and Ed Bryant; Bill Chin; Lloyd Dawson; Arnold Leong; Lee McDonald; Garry Samuels; Bruce Stone, aka Roam-Tel Partners, Ltd.; Ronald Trinchitella, Claimants-Appellants, v. CELLULAR ALASKA PARTNERSHIP, Defendant-Appellee. Bobby CHAUDHURI; Eagle Enterprises I; Mercury Enterprises II, Plaintiffs-Appellees, Ed Bryant; Bill Chin; Lloyd Dawson; Arnold Leong; Lee Mcdonald; Garry Samuels; Bruce Stone, aka Roam-Tel Partners, Ltd.; Ronald Trinchitella, Claimants-Appellants, v. CELLULAR ALASKA PARTNERSHIP, Defendant-Appellee. Glen CONNELLY, an individual, and all persons similarly situated, Plaintiff, and Ed Bryant; Bill Chin; Lloyd Dawson; Arnold Leong; Lee Mcdonald; Garry Samuels; Bruce Stone, aka Roam-Tel Partners, Ltd.; Ronald Trinchitella, Claimants-Appellants, v. CELLULAR ALASKA PARTNERSHIP, Defendant-Appellee. Kathleen SLOAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Ed Bryant; Bill Chin; Lloyd Dawson; Arnold Leong; Lee Mcdonald; Garry Samuels; Bruce Stone, aka Roam-Tel Partners, Ltd.; Ronald Trinchitella, Claimants-Appellants, v. CELLULAR ALASKA PARTNERSHIP, Defendant-Appellee.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Decided August 21, 1998.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Paul F. Kirsch, Townsend and Townsend and Crew, San Francisco, California, for claimants-appellants.

Jacqueline Mottek and Elizabeth Joan Cabraser, Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, San Francisco, California, for plaintiffs-appellees.

Dale E. Barnes, Jr., McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen, San Francisco, California, for defendant-appellee.

Before: HALL and THOMAS, Circuit Judges, and WHALEY, District Judge.

CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL, Circuit Judge:

Eight minority partners who operate various cellular telephone markets appeal the district court's judgment certifying and approving the settlement of class actions against AT & T Wireless Services, Inc., and its affiliates and subsidiaries ("AT & T"), which became the general partner or majority shareholder in these partnerships. This court has jurisdiction over the district court's final order certifying and settling...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases