AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Plaintiff appealed against the grant of summary judgment in favor of the Defendants, challenging the district court's refusal to allow the depositions of Defendants Jose Luis Arrieta and Manuel Arrieta. The Plaintiff criticized the district court's characterization of the proposed discovery as a "fishing expedition."

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff: Argued that the district court erred by refusing the request to take depositions of Defendants Jose Luis Arrieta and Manuel Arrieta, and by characterizing the proposed discovery as a "fishing expedition" (para 2).
• Defendants: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in refusing the Plaintiff's request to take the depositions of Defendants Jose Luis Arrieta and Manuel Arrieta and in characterizing the proposed discovery as a "fishing expedition."

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the Defendants (para 3).

Reasons

• Per ATTREP, J., with MEDINA, J., and IVES, J., concurring: The Court of Appeals remained unpersuaded by the Plaintiff's memorandum in opposition and referred to its previous analysis in the notice of proposed disposition. The Plaintiff failed to assert any new facts, law, or argument that could persuade the Court that the notice of proposed disposition was erroneous. The Court emphasized the burden on the party opposing the proposed disposition to clearly point out errors in fact or law, noting that the repetition of earlier arguments does not fulfill this requirement (para 2).