William Saunders v. Carlisle Memory Products Group, Incorporated, a Delaware Corporation

24 F.3d 249 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. William SAUNDERS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CARLISLE MEMORY PRODUCTS GROUP, INCORPORATED, a Delaware corporation, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-56507. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 5, 1994. * Decided April 21, 1994. Before: BROWNING, PREGERSON, and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** I. 2 Though California Labor Code Sec. 2922 creates a presumption of at-will employment, an employee may rebut this presumption and establish that he or she may be terminated only for good cause by showing: "(1) the [employment] contract was supported by consideration independent of the services to be performed by the employee for his prospective employer; or (2) the parties agree[d], expressly or impliedly, that that employee could be terminated only for good cause." Pugh v. See's Candies, Inc., 171 Cal.Rptr. 917, 925 (Cal.Ct.App.1981) (citation omitted). In determining whether an implied-in-fact…