Helen Rash v. Vons Companies Inc., Dba, Pavillion's

87 F.3d 1321 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Helen RASH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. VONS COMPANIES INC., dba, Pavillion's, Defendant-Appellee. No. 95-56332. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 11, 1996. * Decided June 18, 1996. Before: CANBY, NOONAN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Helen Rash appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment in favor of her former employer, the Vons Companies, Inc. (Vons). Rash's complaint alleged that Vons discriminated against her on the basis of her age in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, Cal. Gov't Code § 12940 , when she was demoted and eventually terminated. She contends that the district court erred by: 1) granting summary judgment on her age discrimination claim and 2) denying her motion for leave to amend her complaint to add a claim for age discrimination in violation of public policy. We review de novo the district court's summary judgment.…