- 18 -
limited by any action taken by the appellate court with respect
to those issues during the appeal.
On remand, a trial court may not deviate from the
mandate of an appellate court * * * “[w]hen a case has
been decided by an appellate court and remanded, the
court to which it is remanded must proceed in
accordance with the mandate and such law of the case as
was established by the appellate court.” Firth v.
United States, 554 F.2d 990, 993 (9th Cir. 1977) * * *
The Supreme Court long ago emphasized that when acting
under an appellate court’s mandate, an inferior court
“cannot vary it, or examine it for any other purpose
than execution; or give any other or further relief; or
review it, even for apparent error, upon any matter
decided upon appeal; or intermeddle with it, further
than to settle so much as has been remanded.” In re
Sanford Fork & Tool Co., 160 U.S. 247, 255 (1895).
[Commercial Paper Holders v. Hine (In re Beverly Hills
Bancorp), 752 F.2d 1334, 1337 (9th Cir. 1984);
alteration in the original.]
The “law of the case” doctrine requires a decision on a
legal issue by an appellate court to be followed in all
subsequent proceedings in the same case. Herrington v. County of
Sonoma, 12 F.3d 901, 904 (9th Cir. 1993). The doctrine generally
precludes reexamination of issues decided either expressly or by
necessary implication by the appellate court upon appeal and
applies to the trial court on remand and even to the appellate
court itself upon a subsequent appeal. Pollei v. Commissioner,
supra at 601. The law of the case acts as a bar only when the
issue in question was actually considered and decided by the
first court and does not extend to issues an appellate court did
not address. United States v. Cote, supra at 181-182.
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011