Fernando Pettis v. Sundstrand Corporation Sundstrand Turbomach, Inc. Does I Through Xx, Inclusive

28 F.3d 108 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Fernando PETTIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SUNDSTRAND CORPORATION; Sundstrand Turbomach, Inc.; Does I Through XX, Inclusive, Defendants-Appellees. No. 93-55086. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 4, 1994. * Decided June 27, 1994. 1 Before: KOZINSKI and TROTT, Circuit Judges, and WILLIAMS, ** Senior District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM *** 3 Pettis challenges the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Sundstrand, claiming that he presented genuine issues of material fact with regard to his claim for breach of his employment contract and termination of his employment in violation of public policy. 4 A. In support of his good cause claim, Pettis points to an internal Sundstrand Division Policy. To be sure, California employment law recognizes that an employee's allegation that an employer has breached its own termination policies and procedures "may be sufficient to state a…