Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation v. Procter & Gamble Co. Procter & Gamble Co., Distributing Co.

15 F.3d 1088 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. PACIFIC INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH AND EVALUATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PROCTER & GAMBLE CO.; Procter & Gamble Co., Distributing Co., Defendants-Appellees. No. 92-15660. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 2, 1993. * Decided Dec. 14, 1993. 1 Before: KOZINSKI and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges; KELLEHER, ** District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM *** 3 The Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation brought suit against the Procter & Gamble Company and the Procter & Gamble Distributing Company for tortiously interfering with contractual relations and prospective economic advantage. The district court granted partial summary judgment and excluded evidence concerning events taking place after the contractual breach. Appellant seeks reversal of the grant of partial summary judgment and the decision to exclude evidence, and requests a new trial. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec.…