Long

Long v. Caesars Palace Corp.

Good Law
23 F. App'x 697
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 15, 2001No. 01-15696; D.C. No. CV-99-00630-LDGCalifornia399 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Linda Long appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment for defendant in her wrongful termination action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment, Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 815 (9th Cir.1994) (per curiam), and we affirm.

Although Long identifies certain evidence which she contends the district court did not consider before it granted summary judgment to defendant, Long did not present that evidence to the district court. Long’s unexplained failure to present evidence sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact does not warrant reversal of the district court’s grant of summary judgment. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23 , 106 S.Ct. 2548 , 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986); Karmun v. Comm’r, 749 F.2d 567, 570 (9th Cir.1984) (explaining that an appellate court will not consider evidence that has not been presented to the district court).

The district court did not err by granting summary judgment on Long’s breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing claims because Long did not rebut the presumption that her employment was…

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.