Arthur R. Petrie II v. General Motors Corporation

46 F.3d 1144 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Arthur R. PETRIE II, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee. No. 93-55588. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted: Oct. 31, 1994. Decided: Jan. 31, 1995. Before: CANBY, LEAVY, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Arthur R. Petrie II appeals from the judgment of the district court arguing that the district court erred in granting summary judgment: 1) as to his ERISA 29 U.S.C. Sec. 1132 claim for recovery of benefits, and 2) as to all of his state law fraud claims. He also contends that the district judge erred in granting summary judgment without considering Petrie's claim that the magistrate judge improperly denied Petrie's motion to compel discovery. We affirm for the reasons stated below. 3 1) The district court granted summary judgment on both of Petrie's ERISA claims asserted under 29 U.S.C. Sec. 1132 and Sec. 1140. See Amended…