Unpublished Disposition, 888 F.2d 1394 (9th Cir. 1989)
Annotate this CaseAdam BENAVIDES, Plaintiff-Appellantv.CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant-Appellee
No. 88-1558.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted Oct. 6, 1989.Decided Nov. 6, 1989.
Before HUG, FARRIS and REINHARDT, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM*
The judgment is affirmed. We have reviewed the thorough findings of fact made by the district court and conclude that they are not clearly erroneous. Moreover, in its memorandum and order the district court applied the correct legal principles and standards. See, Fadhl v. City and County of San Francisco, 741 F.2d 1163 (1984) and Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 109 S. Ct. 1775 (plurality), 1795 (White, J., concurring), 1796 (O'Connor, J., concurring) (1989).
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
