Frank Shields, Plaintiff/counter-Defendant/appellant v. Hall-Mark Electronics Corporation, Defendant/counter-Plaintiff/appellee

103 F.3d 140 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Frank SHIELDS, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant/Appellant, v. HALL-MARK ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff/Appellee. No. 95-55266. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted July 11, 1996. Decided Dec. 10, 1996. 1 Before: FERNANDEZ and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges, and MERHIGE, Senior District Judge. * 2 MEMORANDUM ** 3 Plaintiff-Appellant Frank Shields ("Shields") filed suit against Defendant-Appellee Hall-Mark Electronics Corporation ("Hall-Mark") for (1) age discrimination under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act ("FEHA"), (2) breach of employment contract, (3) negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress, and (4) recision. Shields appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of Hall-Mark on all claims, as well as the court's denial of his motion to amend. We affirm. I. 4 Shields began working for Hall-Mark in March, 1982. At…