Connie K. HAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MOBIL OIL CORPORATION, a New York Corporation, Defendant-Appellee

Good Law
73 F.3d 872·95 Daily Journal DAR 16349·1995 WL 728210·34 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 193·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 35041
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 11, 199594-55373California2,173 words

Opinion

Opinion

Pro, J.

Connie K. Han (“Han”) appeals from the grant of summary judgment in favor of Mobil Oil Corporation (“Mobil”). The district court held that the Han’s claims for breach of contract, bad faith denial of the existence of contract and contractual breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing under the Reimbursement Agreement executed by the parties were barred by a contractual limitations period. The district court’s jurisdiction arose from 28 U.S.C. § 1382 , and we have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

I. Standard of Review

We review de novo a district court’s grant of summary judgment. Jesinger v. Nevada Federal Credit Union, 24 F.3d 1127, 1130 (9th Cir.1994); T.W. Elec. Service, Inc. v. Pacific Elec. Contractors Ass’n, 809 F.2d 626 , 629 (9th Cir.1987). Our review is governed by the same standard used by the trial court under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c). Jesinger, 24 F.3d at 1130 . We must determine, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court correctly applied the relevant substantive law. Jesinger, 24 F.3d at 1130 . The lower…

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.