Ernest Crawford v. Seibu Hawaii

87 F.3d 1318 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Ernest CRAWFORD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SEIBU HAWAII, Defendant-Appellee. No. 94-15924. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 9, 1996. Decided June 12, 1996. Before: FLETCHER, D.W. NELSON and CANBY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Ernest Crawford appeals the district court's judgment, following a bench trial, in favor of Seibu Hawaii in his action alleging employment discrimination on the basis of his race and retaliatory discharge in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm the judgment of the district court. I. 3 We need not set forth all of the facts relevant to Crawford's claims because the parties are familiar with them. Crawford argues that the district court committed reversible error by relying on Exhibit 55, which was not admitted into evidence, to find…