Vancouver Furniture v. General Electric Retail Systems

967 F.2d 596 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. VANCOUVER FURNITURE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GENERAL ELECTRIC RETAIL SYSTEMS, Defendant-Appellee. Nos. 90-35716, 90-35866. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Jan. 7, 1992. Decided June 2, 1992. Before JAMES R. BROWNING, D.W. NELSON and CANBY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Vancouver Furniture ("Vancouver") challenges numerous rulings and jury instructions by the district court during the trial of this action. We affirm. DISCUSSION Negligence 3 The district court withdrew Vancouver's negligence claims from the jury immediately prior to closing arguments after concluding that Vancouver had neither adequately pleaded nor proved a negligence claim. Vancouver argues that valid negligence claims arose out of its contractual relationship with General Electric Retail Systems ("GERS"). Whether Vancouver's claims sound in contract or tort (i.e., negligence) depends upon whether the law…