Case Name: FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY, a California corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF LODI, CALIFORNIA; Jack Sieglock, in his capacity as Mayor of the City of Lodi; Richard Prima, Jr., in his capacity as Enforcing Officer of Lodi Ordinance No. 1650; Randall A. Hays, individually and in his capacity as Lodi City Attorney; Michael C. Donovan, individually and in his capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney; Adam L. Babich, individually and in his capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney; Steven H. Doto, individually and in his capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney; Bret A. Stone, individually and in his capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney; John R. Till, individually and in his capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney; Zevnik, Horton, Guibord and McGovern, LLP, individually and in their capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorneys; Fran E. Forkas, in his capacity as Enforcing Officer of Lodi Ordinance No. 1650, Defendants-Appellees; Unigard Insurance Company, a Washington corporation; Unigard Security Insurance Company, a Washington corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. City of Lodi, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-04-17
Citations: 287 F.3d 810
Docket Number: Nos. 99-15614, 99-15802
Parties: FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY, a California corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF LODI, CALIFORNIA; Jack Sieglock, in his capacity as Mayor of the City of Lodi; Richard Prima, Jr., in his capacity as Enforcing Officer of Lodi Ordinance No. 1650; Randall A. Hays, individually and in his capacity as Lodi City Attorney; Michael C. Donovan, individually and in his capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney; Adam L. Babich, individually and in his capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney; Steven H. Doto, individually and in his capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney; Bret A. Stone, individually and in his capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney; John R. Till, individually and in his capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney; Zevnik, Horton, Guibord and McGovern, LLP, individually and in their capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorneys; Fran E. Forkas, in his capacity as Enforcing Officer of Lodi Ordinance No. 1650, Defendants-Appellees. Unigard Insurance Company, a Washington corporation; Unigard Security Insurance Company, a Washington corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. City of Lodi, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before: PREGERSON, D.W. NELSON, Circuit Judges and MOSKOWITZ, District Judge.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 287
Pages: 810–811

Head Matter:
FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY, a California corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF LODI, CALIFORNIA; Jack Sieglock, in his capacity as Mayor of the City of Lodi; Richard Prima, Jr., in his capacity as Enforcing Officer of Lodi Ordinance No. 1650; Randall A. Hays, individually and in his capacity as Lodi City Attorney; Michael C. Donovan, individually and in his capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney; Adam L. Babich, individually and in his capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney; Steven H. Doto, individually and in his capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney; Bret A. Stone, individually and in his capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney; John R. Till, individually and in his capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorney; Zevnik, Horton, Guibord and McGovern, LLP, individually and in their capacity as Lodi Assistant City Attorneys; Fran E. Forkas, in his capacity as Enforcing Officer of Lodi Ordinance No. 1650, Defendants-Appellees. Unigard Insurance Company, a Washington corporation; Unigard Security Insurance Company, a Washington corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. City of Lodi, Defendant-Appellee.
Nos. 99-15614, 99-15802.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Filed April 17, 2002.
Before: PREGERSON, D.W. NELSON, Circuit Judges and MOSKOWITZ, District Judge.
. The Honorable Barry Ted Moskowitz, United States District Judge for the Southern District of California, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
ORDER WITHDRAWING OPINION
ORDER
The opinion filed on January 8, 2002, slip op. 229, and appearing at 271 F.3d 911 (9th Cir.2001) is hereby withdrawn. It may not be cited as precedent by or to this court or any district court of the Ninth Circuit.