Robin Orr v. Bank of America, Nt & Sa

Bad Law
285 F.3d 764·2002 WL 507525
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 5, 200200-16509California7,767 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sneed, J.

ORDER AND AMENDED OPINION

ORDER

The mandate, issued on March 27, 2002, is hereby recalled.

The opinion filed March 5, 2002, is amended. The Hearsay section of the opinion is substantially amended.

The panel directs the Clerk to reenter judgment. The parties may seek panel rehearing or rehearing en banc thereafter within the time limits provided by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 40.

OPINION

Robin Orr (“Orr”) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Bank of America (“BOA”). The district court found that most of the evidence submitted by Orr in support of her opposition to BOA’s motion for summary judgment was inadmissible due to inadequate authentication and hearsay. It held Orr had failed to present any admissible evidence to raise a triable issue of material fact and thus entered summary judgment in favor of BOA on Orr’s First Amended Complaint (“Complaint”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

BACKGROUND

Orr was a service manager for BOA’s Incline Village branch in 1992. Joe Bour-deau (“Bourdeau”) was its sales manager. In July 1992, the branch suffered a nighttime deposit loss of $12,000. As part of its…

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.