Pavarneh Davarpanah v. J.C. Penney Company, (Two Cases) Pavarneh Davarpanah Sunny Patten Beverly A. Lindblad, and Eileen Glass v. J.C. Penney Company, Eileen Glass Beverly A. Lindblad Sunny Patten v. J.C. Penney Company, Pavarneh Davarpanah Beverly A. Lindblad Sunny Patten v. J.C. Penney Company

Good Law
46 F.3d 1140·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 7197
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 23, 199593-35273California1,874 words

Opinion

Opinion

46 F.3d 1140 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Pavarneh DAVARPANAH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. J.C. PENNEY COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. (Two Cases) Pavarneh DAVARPANAH; Sunny Patten; Beverly A. Lindblad, Plaintiffs, and Eileen Glass, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. J.C. PENNEY COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. Eileen GLASS; Beverly A. Lindblad; Sunny Patten, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. J.C. PENNEY COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. Pavarneh DAVARPANAH; Beverly A. Lindblad; Sunny Patten, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. J.C. PENNEY COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 93-35273, 93-35284, 93-35543, 93-35588 and 93-35590. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Dec. 6, 1994. Decided Jan. 23, 1995. Before: NOONAN, O'SCANNLAIN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 We are asked by appellant Eileen Glass to adjudicate a series of challenges to the district court's jury instructions in this case. We must also decide whether the district court abused its discretion…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.