Steven P. Peck v. King County

5 F.3d 538 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Steven P. PECK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. KING COUNTY, Defendant-Appellee. No. 91-36324. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 5, 1993. * Decided Aug. 31, 1993. 1 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington; No. CV-91-123-R, Barbara J. Rothstein, District Judge, Presiding. 2 W.D.Wash. 3 AFFIRMED. 4 MEMORANDUM *** 5 Before: BEEZER and HALL, Circuit Judges, and ARMSTRONG, ** 6 The plaintiff, Steven P. Peck, sued his former employer, King County, for violating his Fourteenth Amendment due process rights, by firing him without a hearing from his position as a corrections officer. Mr. Peck appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment to King County. We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 . We AFFIRM. 7 The only issue raised by this appeal is whether the district court erred in finding no genuine issue of material fact regarding Mr. Peck's…