Larry Grant v. City of Long Beach, 96 F.4th 1255

Larry Grant and his daughter, P.C., appealed a district court’s summary judgment ruling in favor of the City of Long Beach and Gabriela Rodriguez.
Grant and P.C. alleged violations of their constitutional rights (association and due process) as well as state-law claims.
The appellants filed an opening appellate brief but did not file a reply brief.
The appellate brief was found to include material misrepresentations and fabricated case law references.
The Ninth Circuit issued a focus order prior to oral argument, asking about the apparently non-existent cases.
Appellants’ counsel could not adequately explain or correct the miscitations, leading the Court to strike the brief and dismiss the appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Compliance with appellate briefing rules	Grant argued procedural and substantive errors below supported reversal	City maintained the brief was non-compliant, inaccurate	Appeal dismissed for failure to comply with rules
Use of accurate and relevant case law citations	Cited numerous cases as authority for his claims	Pointed out misrepresentation and fabrication of citations	Found appellant's citations were inappropriate
Whether summary judgment for defendants was proper	Claimed constitutional and state-law rights were violated	Argued summary judgment was correct	Did not rule on merits—procedural dismissal
Adequacy of counsel's explanations for citations	Tried to explain or distinguish miscited/nonexistent cases at argument	Argued explanations were insufficient	Explanations found unpersuasive and inadequate

Sekiya v. Gates, 508 F.3d 1198 (9th Cir. 2007) (discusses mandatory appellate briefing requirements)
N/S Corp. v. Liberty Mut. Ins., 127 F.3d 1145 (9th Cir. 1997) (court’s discretion to dismiss appeal due to briefing deficiencies)
In re O'Brien, 312 F.3d 1135 (9th Cir. 2002) (authority for striking a brief and dismissing an appeal for rule violations)