Rowlands

Rowlands v. Hanson

Good Law
55 F. App'x 438
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 16, 2003No. 01-36150; D.C. No. CV-97-01645-HACalifornia533 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Robert J. Rowlands appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment in favor of Chuck Hanson in his diversity action alleging breach of contract, fraud, and violation of Or.Rev.Stat. § 166.720, the Oregon Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations statute (“ORICO”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . After de novo review, Jenkins v. Commonwealth Land Title Ins. Co., 95 F.3d 791, 795 (9th Cir.1996), we affirm.

Given that Rowlands sought only lost profits on his breach of contract claim, that claim fails because he did not show “with ‘reasonable certainty’ that profits were lost and that the loss was a result of [Hanson’s] breach.” Willamette Quarries, Inc. v. Wodtli, 93 Or.App. 306 , 761 P.2d 1356, 1359 (Or.Ct.App.1988) (citation omitted); see also Vestar Dev. II, LLC v. Gen. Dynamics Corp., 249 F.3d 958, 962 (9th Cir. 2001) (affirming dismissal of breach of contract claim because lost profits were too speculative); Steckman v. Hart Brewing, Inc., 143 F.3d 1293, 1295 (9th Cir.1998) (this court may affirm on any ground supported by the record).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Rowlands’s claim that Hanson forged one of…

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.