Earl Nissen v. Churchill County School District Churchill County School Board of Trustees and Robert Quisenberry

86 F.3d 1163 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Earl NISSEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CHURCHILL COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT; Churchill County School Board of Trustees; and Robert Quisenberry, Defendants-Appellees. No. 95-15802. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 13, 1996. Decided May 31, 1996. Before: ALARCON, BEEZER and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Dr. Earl Nissen appeals from the district court's entry of summary judgment in favor of Appellees Churchill County School District, et al. (collectively "Churchill") on Nissen's claims of age discrimination and violation of his due process rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. 3 * Nissen argues that the district court erred in finding that he was a probationary employee and granting summary judgment on his due process claim. 1 A grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo. Jesinger v. Nevada Federal Credit Union, 24 F.3d 1127, 1130 (9th…