Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors
| Decision Date | 14 September 2001 |
| Docket Number | No. 99-15602,99-17186.,99-15602 |
| Citation | 275 F.3d 1187 |
| Parties | Latrell F. SPREWELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS; National Basketball Association, Defendants-Appellees. Latrell F. Sprewell, Plaintiff, and Robert Thompson, Jr.; Gordon J. Rose; Stephen G. Weizenecker; Thompson & Associates; Robert A. Gist; Paul F. Utrecht; Gist, Kennedy & Associates, Appellants, v. Golden State Warriors; National Basketball Association, Defendants-Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Paul F. Utrecht, Law Offices of Paul F. Utrecht, San Francisco, California, for plaintiff-appellant Sprewell.
Richard R. Dale, Law Offices of Richard R. Dale, Mill Valley, California for plaintiffs-appellants Thompson, et al.
Jeffrey A. Mishkin (Argued), Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, New York, New York, for the defendant-appellees.
Frank Rothman (On the Briefs) and Marie L. Hurabiell (On the Briefs), Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Los Angeles, California, for defendant National Basketball Association.
Martin P. Moroski (On the Briefs), Sinsheimer, Schiebelhut & Baggett, San Luis Obispo, California, for the defendants-appellees.
Before: D.W. NELSON, THOMPSON, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
The Opinion filed September 14, 2001, is amended as follows:
At Slip Op. 13304-13305 266 F.3d 979, 989, in the sentence which begins "The arbitration award effectively and persuasively fleshes out the fact ...", delete the portion of the sentence that reads, "The arbitration award effectively and persuasively fleshes out the fact that the actions taken by the NBA and the Warriors were motivated solely by Sprewell's misconduct and were not, as Sprewell states," and substitute "The uncontested facts set forth in the arbitration award effectively and persuasively rebut the conclusory allegations made by Sprewell, that the actions taken by the NBA and the Warriors were" The sentence would then read:
The uncontested facts set forth in the arbitration award effectively and persuasively rebut the conclusory allegations made by Sprewell, that the actions taken by the NBA and the Warriors were the product of America's "fear of the black man's physicality and rage, and the fear and resentment of the black man's success, along with the corresponding anger that the black man is not grateful for what he has been `given.'"
With these amendments, the panel...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kandi v. Langford
...to judicial notice or by exhibit," Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors, 266 F.3d 979, 988 (9th Cir.), amended on denial of reh'g, 275 F.3d 1187 (9th Cir. 2001) (citation omitted). In general, civil rights complaints are interpreted liberally in order to give pro se plaintiffs "the benefit of ......
-
Lauter v. Anoufrieva
...See Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors, 266 F.3d 979, 988 (9th Cir.2001), amended in non-pertinent part on denial of rehearing, 275 F.3d 1187 (2001). In the case of a pro se plaintiff, pleadings are liberally construed to afford him the benefit of any doubt. See Karim-Panahi v. Los Angeles P......
-
Guy v. Lorenzen
...or unreasonable inferences." Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors , 266 F.3d 979, 988 (9th Cir. 2001), amended on other grounds by , 275 F.3d 1187 (9th Cir. 2001). It is not proper for the court to assume that "the [plaintiff] can prove facts that it has not alleged or that the defendants have......
-
Waln v. Dysart Sch. Dist.
...allege those facts.").Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors , 266 F.3d 979, 988-89 (9th Cir.), opinion amended on denial of reh'g , 275 F.3d 1187 (9th Cir. 2001).22 The federal courts have generally construed the standard stated in Tinker as that applied to school regulations directed at studen......
-
Iqbal 'Plausibility' in Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Litigation
...of factual allegations . . . .’” (citations omitted)); Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors, 266 F.3d 979, 988 (9th Cir. 2001), amended , 275 F.3d 1187 (9th Cir. 2004) (“Nor is the court required to accept as true allegations that are merely conclusory, unwarranted deductions of fact, or unrea......