Paula Keller v. Golden Corral Franchising Systems

Good Law
359 F. App'x 716
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 12, 200908-55815California740 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

As the parties are familiar with the facts of the case, we state them here only as necessary to explain our decision. Plaintiffs Paula and Jason Keller and the ARK System (“Plaintiffs”) filed California state breach of contract and concealment claims against Golden Corral Franchising Systems (“Golden Corral”) and RAI Restaurants, Inc. (“RAI”). Plaintiffs also filed a California Franchise Investment Law (“CFIL”) claim against Golden Corral under Cal. Corp.Code § 31300. The district court granted summary judgment to Golden Corral and RAI on all claims on the sole basis that Plaintiffs were required to show damages for each claim and Plaintiffs failed to plead any specific facts or offer any admissible evidence as to damages. Plaintiffs timely appealed. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm in part and reverse in part.

I.

Plaintiffs contend that the district court erred in granting summary judgment to Golden Corral and RAI on Plaintiffs’ breach of contract claims because Golden Corral and RAI did not adequately raise damages as a basis for summary judgment with respect to those claims.

A district court may enter summary judgment sua sponte on an issue…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.