Moreland

Moreland v. Campagni

Good Law
103 F. App'x 193
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 25, 2004Nos. 03-16381, 03-16480, 03-16481; D.C. No. CV-01-00369-HDMCalifornia600 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Plaintiff William Moreland and defendants Timothy Morsani and The Richard and Mary Campagni Family Trust (“Campagni”) each appeal from the judgment entered in this action for breach of contract. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s legal conclusions, see Friends of Yosemite Valley v. Norton, 348 F.3d 789, 793 (9th Cir.2003), its application of res judicata and collateral estoppel, see Littlejohn v. United States, 321 F.3d 915, 919 (9th Cir.2003), and the question of standing, see Walker v. City of Lakewood, 272 F.3d 1114, 1122 (9th Cir.2001). We review for abuse of discretion the district court’s decision to deny equitable relief, see Appling v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 340 F.3d 769, 780 (9th Cir.2003), and we review for clear error its computation of damages, see Amantea-Cabrera v. Potter, 279 F.3d 746, 750 (9th Cir.2002). We affirm the judgment in part and reverse it in part.

Because the parties are familiar with the facts, we recite them only as necessary for this decision. As to Moreland’s appeal, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to order specific performance, for…

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.